Tonight I saw someone that I was good friends with several years ago. Our friendship ended mainly because I went to college and he didn't and because when I saw him he would make offensive comments.
Example: Last fourth of July my friend who's from Sri Lanka unknowingly sat down in a chair where someone else had been planning to sit. He said, "Oh, you just got brown skinned." We said, "Brown skinned?" and he said, "Yeah, it's like being jewed." We told him those comments made us uncomfortable and he continued to say similar things, later attacking one of my friends by saying she hated men.
Tonight I saw this friend again and he was with another friend that likes to make offensive comments. They started saying offensive things and told me they were going to hit me with a car because I am a Marxist. I told them I was uncomfortable with what they were saying. They would stop and then start again on a new train of offensive things. I didn't want to leave because I knew as soon as I did they would talk about me and how I have no sense of humor, but I wanted to leave because I was uncomfortable. Eventually I just left.
This left the question: why do they feel it necessary to make these comments? I feel like I have a very humor-filled life without making jokes that bring groups of people down. Do they enjoy making other people uncomfortable? And if so, why do they enjoy it?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8025457.stmI don't have time to write about this, as I have much homework to do, but it's an interesting article. What do you think about it?
I've had the experience of men not calling me back after it seemed like they were interested in me. I've had many friends who have shared this same experience and we ponder over why these males fail to return our phone calls. Thus when I saw a link to
an article about why men don't call women back, I'd thought I would read it and see if it had anything insightful to say. The article was written by a "dating coach," Rachel Greenwald and according to the article, the number one reason why men don't call women back is something the author labeled as, "The Boss Lady." She described men as seeing women as, "Terrific -- smart and successful -- but he decides he'd rather hire her than date her. In such a situation, women typically guess that men are intimidated by their success or strong personality. But men said they get enough aggression at work all day, and when they come home they want to be with someone softer, more nurturing. They do want someone intelligent with an interesting career, but they prefer a warm demeanor." What Greenwald is saying is that we need to tone down what we think of as our, "success or strong personality," and get, "a warm demeanor." This sounded a lot like essays I read for my "Victorian Literature" class last term, about how women should always put forth sweetness. I thought maybe I was misinterpreting what she said, until I read on further to see her dating tips. The first one was "Soften your delivery." Women are supposed to, "[tone] down your conversation style from combative or challenging to gracious, and even a little flirtatious, goes a long way." Instead of having intelligent conversation, where a point can be made, women should flirt. Dating tip number two was to "Look like a women." Women are supposed to "think Scarlett O'Hara not Hillary Clinton." Instead of dressing like a successful woman, involved in a field that is largely dominated by men, women should dress like a character from "Gone with the Wind." The last tip is to "Select what you need, not want." Us "Boss Ladies" should go for a "nurturing, giving type of guy can be optimal (maybe he's a teacher or chef instead of Wall Street broker?)" because obviously there can't be two people making money in a relationship, right?
This article made me glad that sometimes I don't get a call back. All this time I've been dealing with self-esteem issues as they relate to the opposite sex, when really I just come off as too successful, I don't dress like Scarlett O'Hara, and I am attracted to people that I think are going to successful rather than simply "nurturing."
Amelia was looking for a volunteers to post something about feminism and coincidentally at the time I was looking at various sex toys online with a friend. She came to the section of "Sex dolls," something that I've never seen or looked at outside of "Lars and the Real Girl." The first entry was "Big Babe Bella," who is a "petite chubby [that] can’t wait to meet the chubby in your pants!" What stuck me most about the description is not only is "Big Babe Bella" given objectifying characteristics, the reviewers act the same way. "Big Babe Bella" apparently "takes it and takes it good." The doll serves as a completely submissive version of a woman, one that has "2 welcoming entries for supreme orgasms so choose her vagina or her anus."
Next we looked at "Wrap Around Lover Doll," a doll that can wrap fake limps around the penetrator. Like "Big Babe Bella," the doll is treated as if human, her description stating, "This sexy slut wants to wrap her long silky legs around you!" It concludes by saying, "She’s gotta have it hard, fast, and right now!" This casts the "Wrap Around Lover Doll" as a sex-craved woman, who wants it hard and fast. While the link between objectification of women and pornography can be shady at times, this seems like more of a direct line. They literally are objects in the form of a woman that exist entirely for whatever sexual pleasure the user wishes to inflict upon them.
We did find male sex dolls, but often they had an anal or oral passage, implying use by men. They also varied in their descriptions, such as "Mr. Stud Love Doll," who "is your perfect lover! His go the tool to satisfy your hot steamy fantasy," (Yes, there were grammer mistakes in the description) which lacks the feel of "submissive slut" that the descriptions of the female dolls had.
Here is a link to the website should anyone desire to explore for themselves:
http://racy.com/love-dolls.html
