Senate Misogyny, Entitlement, and Pop Culture

Don't ask me if I'm okay. I don't like you and you have no place asking me that.

To the rest of your comment. You know I was referring to the study PY just posted. It occurred to me that I should be more precise, but I thought I would receive a little good faith. Guess not. Fine. Let me correct. The (straight) women on dating apps, as a whole, according to that study (wow this is a lot of extra words I have to use!), have unrealistic expectations.

PY just posted that straight guys are shlubs who think taking care of their appearance makes them gay. Quite a generalization! But you had nothing to say about it.

PY also suggested that guys pretty themselves up. Maybe put on some makeup? I thought women don't like when men say something like that about women? Then maybe it shouldn't be said about men. I mean, should we tell people to make themselves more pretty, or not?

 

Hm, not sure that removing “nerd culture” from the title was a good move. It might be comforting to think that these behaviors are exclusive to the incel fringe instead of a structural part of mainstream pop culture, but that’s part wishful thinking, part avoidance of responsibility.

 

Something I've noticed over the years since incel discourse took off in 2014: a lot of the women, and men, who lament incels online and push discourse in new directions, they seem to be incels as well. Like, they want to be having sex, but aren't getting it. I'm not referring to the mainstream pundits like Valenti, Marcotte, Sarkeesian, etc., but the semi-anonymous folks online who drive the discourse. The unifying factor between these misogynist incels and feminist incels, seems to be that they haven't achieved a desired social status that is needed in order to have the confidence to pursue a sexuality they desire.

Inadequate social status resulting in pathology is not a new phenomenon. We have previously thought of this as the "mid-life crisis", where a person's social status changes, or fails to progress as expected, and this makes them unable to have a satisfying sexuality with their spouse. What's different about "incel" discourse is that it identifies the crisis as occurring in adolescence or early adulthood, before a conforming sexuality has developed.

I think the nerd-ification of sexual pathology tends to go overboard, and is a reflection of social media which creates economies of virtue. Comments, replies, shares, and likes become a kind of currency for establishing a virtual social status to alleviate the absence of a satisfying, really existing social status. It's a way to express a desire for a healthy sexuality in lieu of pursuing one. Nerd consumer culture becomes a proxy for socialization, and people come up with increasingly complex critical theory-based frameworks for valuating consumer experiences/goods.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, "incel" discourse seems designed to perpetuate itself rather than enlighten or transform.

 

It makes sense that people would want to look their best in a situation where they know they're going to be judged on their looks. "Looking your best" is a situational thing, however. Look your best for whom? For what purpose? There's a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that when many straight women dress up for a date with a man, the little "judgment voice" they hear in the backs of their heads that tells them if they look good or not isn't that of a heterosexual man. Rather, they hear an amalgamation of largely feminine voices reflecting the opinions of real female peers and the imaginary ones that speak from women featured in magazine pages, internet ads, and movie screens. A number of studies have demonstrated that the female image the average straight man wants to see is not at all identical to the one the average straight woman wants to present.

I see no particular reason why the inverse shouldn't be true for men.

I think it pretty clearly depends on the context. Walking up to a stranger or a professional acquaintance and saying, apropos of nothing, "You'd be prettier if you smiled more," is invasive and weird, because of the implied inappropriate assumption that they are (or ought to be) concerned primarily with how attractive you find them, and not with doing their job or shopping for tomatoes or whatever it is they're trying to accomplish. On the other hand, if you're engaging with a particular theory as to why many men are not found as physically attractive as they would like when using a particular dating app, then it makes perfect sense to speculate on what might cause the mismatch between hopes and reality.

"Shlubs" is obviously a negatively-charged word that I don't think adds a lot to the discussion, but it's a pretty common belief in the U.S. that a man who seems over-interested in how he looks becomes unappealingly feminine. Exactly where the line between "good grooming" and "gay" is drawn depends on which subculture you're talking about, as does the line between "rough around the edges" and "dirty."

I have no formal studies to point to, although I suppose if you really wanted I could look, but it's my perception that most of the "policing" around masculine behaviors and identities is done by men. Not exclusively by men, of course. I informally study and collect "man rules" tweets and memes that get shopped around the internet, and quite a lot of the authors present themselves as straight women. However, it's largely men who threaten other men with violence, and it's more often men who gatekeep other males' access to resources like good-paying jobs and useful spheres of influence.

So to return to the original question, what kind of judging voice does a man hear in his head when he's trying to "look his best?" Is it a seductive straight woman's voice, or is the voice of a threatening man?

The easiest way to sift out confounding factors such as "whose approval does a man most seek when he gets dressed for a date?" is to do cross-cultural studies with some equivalent of Tinder. If the strangely mismatched "Gini coefficients" between straight men and straight women persist no matter the nation or age group, then I think a "men are like this, women are like that" evolutionary biology take could be the most compelling. If those stats do not hold up (and I rather suspect they wouldn't), then clearly something else besides innate sex differences is going on.

 

It's also the name of five to ten boys born in the US every year. My point was that 'funny' first names used to tarnish people are double-edged swords.

 

I have no respect for that response. It’s total bull****.

Women say 80% of men are below average looking. PY’s response is that men need to work on their appearance. I just can’t get over it. The more obvious response would be how the **** can 80% of men be below average looking? Does that even math? PY admits that this is statistically impossible, but attempts to justify it, anyway. The obvious place to look is at the people making the claim; women. I’ve heard of that stat many times, I’ve never heard anyone try to explain it by blaming men. When called on it, PY gives a bunch of gibberish rationalizing. PY is completely unable to critically examine women on this point. It simply must be men’s fault somehow. Everyone else in the thread is silent on the issue, besides the pedantry about generalizing and the passive aggressive concern trolling about whether or not I’m okay.

If men said 80% of women are below average looking (they don’t), the obvious response would be that men are shallow. It would be a given, without a second thought. Women say it, and well, it must be because men are slobs, because we all know women are never shallow. If someone suggested women improve their appearance, it would not be received kindly.

It’s just shocking hypocrisy. I can’t get over it. It belongs in the poser thread.

 

Yeah, but they're not real Americans, they're the foreign kind. That's on them.

 

Look dude, idgaf if you like me or not. You made a post that was uncharacteristic of you, and I asked you about it. I don't know why the **** you're so angry right now, It wasn't "passive aggressive concern trolling," it was actual concern.

As for Ben's post, admittingly, I can't make it through most of his posts-they are simply too long for me to process, right now. It's not because of the content or anything even remotely personal, it's my **** concentration and attention span. I'm starting another med for it soon. So, I think I missed some important context that you were responding to, probably sarcastically. So, that's on me.

Also, chill the **** out, jesus christ.

 

Keeping nerd culture in the title implies that it's exclusive to nerds. Why not put "pop culture" in the title, since pop culture is what you're talking about. Nerds =/= Mainstream Pop Culture

 

Pop culture would be my ideal title, yep. Thanks for submitting.

 

I actually fully support changing incel culture to pop culture in the title!

 

thirded

 

So be it.

 

Seconded.

And Ben, I do actually have to agree with CT here, sorry man. It sounds like the women in that study are being too picky. As a woman who doesn't do anything for my appearance other than throw on a tshirt and jeans, I don't want to be judged for that. I don't think men on dating apps should be held to a higher standard. I think women in that study are being too picky.

BUT... I think men on dating apps are probably too picky about appearance as well. Hell I had a guy reject me on there the other day because I was taller than him. Seems like a silly reason to me, but maybe I am the weird one because I find the vast majority of guys on dating apps to be fine looking.

So... Maybe we should say the problem is less with guys not dressing nice enough or women all being shallow.... But with the actual "swipe left based merely on a shallow first impression" nature of most dating apps?

 

There's no need to blame nerds, when everyone knows it's all the filthy gamers' fault.

 

CT, sounds to me poor yorick is trying to explain that figure, not defend it.

@poor yorick, source? Test group needs to be >3000 or it's horse****. Sorry for being a nerd

 

Yeah, so the 80% figure... a couple of points.

1) We don't know who these people are, and what appeals to them. For example, @Lord Vivec posted a great ****-post picture (and apologies I know it was in the last few weeks I just can't be arsed to find out exactly which one) with something about the GOP saying "Leftists want this to be life as we know it" and it was like a nerdy-dude (maybe in semi-slave gear) on a couch, surrounded by three goth-y / nerd-y / BDSM-y women standing behind the couch. And I responded "You take the two on the left, Mav and I would take the one on the right" and we agreed this would be an amenable solution. And all three of the women were clearly attractive, but the two on the left didn't do it for me (and I showed Mav the picture and she's telling the dog "I'm so glad he knows my type..." -- these are the conversations we have with the dog...)

To wit: these respondents -- and it sounds like it may be a small sample size -- the guys didn't do it for them, and they were commenting on their appearances it sounds like, which...

2) Yes, appearances matter. And there's a friggin' massive double-standard on men being able to go out and do things unkempt vs. women, who basically have to be put together at all times sociologically, which suuuuuuuuuuuuuucks. I made the point in the President thread about why Bernie gets crap about his hair, and it's not making fun of Bernie for Bernie's hair, it's making fun of Bernie's hair because literally everyone else needs to worry about it in order to appear Presidential, and it was specifically a problem in 2016. We don't make fun of Donald Trump because he spends $70,000 on his hair -- we make fun of him because he spends $70,000 on his hair and it looks terrible.

If you want to meet someone you need to put in effort. This means you need to put in effort everywhere, including how you look. I'm not talking about your actual face -- but doing hair, shaving, dressing, etc. if you're not putting in effort, I'm presuming you will be judged as "below average" (and then factoring in people who just don't do it for you).

Remember, humans are terrible about judging masses of people. As George Carlin said: “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” And then remember that I think like 70% of folks think they are above average... that's what we're dealing with.

 

Good to see who among you suddenly agree with Bowen when the genders are reversed.

 

dp4m, these are very separate points. Yes, there are double standards about women's versus men's appearances. But it can also be true that women, no less than men, are affected by mass media representations about beauty that deviate significantly from average appearance. It is possible for people to be discriminated against and themselves show prejudice.

 

My mom just said I belong to the other 20%. Women are always right.

 

"Darth Punk is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life."

 

The only thing it's maybe an indictment of is apps that have you swiping just based entirely on looks. Blech.