SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I came across this piece on Scott Adam's blog and found it quite interesting. Thought others here might find it interesting too:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/133406477506/global-gender-war#_=_
So if you are wondering how men become cold-blooded killers, it isn't religion that is doing it. If you put me in that situation, I can say with confidence I would sign up for suicide bomb duty. And I'm not even a believer. Men like hugging better than they like killing. But if you take away my access to hugging, I will probably start killing, just to feel something. I'm designed that way. I'm a normal boy. And I make no apology for it.
Now consider the controversy over the Syrian immigrants. The photos show mostly men of fighting age. No one cares about adult men, so a 1% chance of a hidden terrorist in the group – who might someday kill women and children – is unacceptable. I have twice blogged on the idea of siphoning out the women and small kids from the Caliphate and leaving millions of innocent adult men to suffer and die. I don't recall anyone complaining about leaving millions of innocent adult males to horrible suffering. In this country, any solution to a problem that involves killing millions of adult men is automatically on the table.
If you kill infidels, you will be rewarded with virgins in heaven. But if you kill your own leaders today – the ones holding the leash on your balls – you can have access to women tomorrow. And tomorrow is sooner.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jdavidb on Saturday November 21 2015, @01:51AM
It's that first sentence that I take issue with: "When we get home, access to sex is strictly controlled by the woman." Of course access to sex is and should be strictly controlled by the woman. Sex shouldn't happen unless they are both enthusiastic about it. In that sense it's "strictly controlled," by both of them, but of course typically the man is much more likely to be enthusiastic. Of course that isn't always the case - sometimes she is enthusiastic and he is not! (I'm sure it happened somewhere at least once in the last millennium.)
Sex should absolutely happen in an environment and relationship that makes the woman feel enthusiastic about sex. If that's not the case, then the relationship ought to be adjusted until she's enthusiastic. It's for the happiness and the emotional health of all concerned. Sex usually has a lot less emotional repercussions for a man than a woman. She shouldn't have to deal with negative emotional repercussions simply because he's not dedicated enough to her to learn how to construct an environment and relationship that makes her feel enthusiastic about sex. He ought to care for her this much, at least. If he doesn't want to do that, prostitutes and porn are out there.
If a woman doesn't want to set the bar as high as I'm describing, that's certainly her choice. But many women find that they are very unhappy if they have sex when they are not enthusiastic. And in most cases, if he invests some time and effort in learning to meet her emotional needs, he can create a relationship in which she continues to be enthusiastic about sex long term.
Nobody should have to give up control in a relationship. Not the man and not the woman. The sentence about access to sex being strictly controlled by the woman indicates that Scott Adams feels that the woman should give up some of that control for the man's benefit. This is just a bad idea for any issue in a relationship (not just sex), and when you start using words that can be taken to mean that a woman should give up control over her body, you are getting into an area where you are going to get a lot of negative emotional reactions from most normal women, not to mention complete vitriol from some who are into activism and the hopeless cause of straightening out everybody in the world.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 1) by Francis on Saturday November 21 2015, @01:02PM
This is some of the most overtly misandrist dribble I've seen in a while. Of course women should be giving up some of that power, they shouldn't have had it in the first place!
What you're describing is domestic violence. Wholehearted consent isn't the standard here, the question is whether or not both parties are willing to consent. Unless both parties require about the same amount of sex, the low demand partner is going to have to agree to some sex that they aren't enthusiastic about for the health of the marriage.
It's way too common for women to be mad about something and use that as an excuse to punish the husband by withholding sex. That's abuse and there's really no other way of looking at it. It's not something that the husband can really defend against other than by seeking a divorce.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Saturday November 21 2015, @01:24PM
Unless both parties require about the same amount of sex, the low demand partner is going to have to agree to some sex that they aren't enthusiastic about for the health of the marriage.
Do you have any actual credentials or studies? I'm going by the experience and research of this marriage counselor [marriagebuilders.com] who has helped save marriages for decades. In his words, regarding statements like this, "It's dangerous stuff you are recommending. It ruins marriages."
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 1) by Francis on Sunday November 22 2015, @12:36PM
Are you seriously arguing that sex isn't for bonding as well as making babies? There's at on of research evidence out there that oxytocin levels spike during and immediately after sex and oxytocin itself is primarily about bonding people together. Not to mention the resentment from somebody holding out.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/love-and-gratitude/201310/oxytocin-the-love-and-trust-hormone-can-be-deceptive [psychologytoday.com]
There are serious problems associated with long periods of time without sex.
http://www.articlesbase.com/womens-health-articles/effects-of-celibacy-454770.html [articlesbase.com]
Also, that link has nothing to do with the passage you quoted.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Sunday November 22 2015, @12:49PM
Are you seriously arguing that sex isn't for bonding as well as making babies?
No.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Sunday November 22 2015, @12:53PM
There are serious problems associated with long periods of time without sex.
There are also serious problems for a woman if she has sex when she is not enthusiastic about it, so since a man needs sex it would behoove him to learn how to create a relationship and environment that leads to her being enthusiastic about sex.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday November 21 2015, @02:33PM
Unless both parties require about the same amount of sex, the low demand partner is going to have to agree to some sex that they aren't enthusiastic about for the health of the marriage.
I wonder why these discussions are always about marriage. The exact same thing could be said if you just replaced that word with "relationship". Marriage is just a silly social ritual that some people seem to believe is magic; I see little reason to assume that it's an inevitability in a relationship or that it will magically improve everything.
That's abuse and there's really no other way of looking at it.
Controlling your own body is abusing someone else? You're not entitled to sex in the first place. If someone doesn't consent to having sex with you, you have not lost anything, so there's no conceivable way withholding sex could qualify as "abuse".
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Sunday November 22 2015, @01:45AM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Sunday November 22 2015, @01:47AM
Controlling your own body is abusing someone else? You're not entitled to sex in the first place.
Yes, exactly! In Dr. Harley's nomenclature, to engage in abuse, you have to actually do something. Not doing something is not abuse, and in fact he encourages you to not do something in your relationship if you are not enthusiastic about it.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 1) by Francis on Sunday November 22 2015, @12:23PM
Withholding is an action you engage in in this context. Not having sex because you're physically unable is one thing, not having sex to control the other person is quite a different thing.
And yes, withholding sex definitely is a form of abuse. You see it on TV all the time being used as abuse and nobody seems to care. But, anytime you're doing something to take power from somebody else and use it to control them, that is abuse. If Dr. Harley is arguing otherwise, then he's a fucking moron that ought to have his license revoked because that's not competent psychological treatment.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Sunday November 22 2015, @12:54PM
If Dr. Harley is arguing otherwise, then he's a fucking moron that ought to have his license revoked because that's not competent psychological treatment.
The thing is, his approach leads to a happy relationship with lots of sex, whereas the approach of calling your wife or girlfriend an abuser or otherwise lecturing her for not having sex with you leads to loneliness and sexual frustration.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings