• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

This week in feminism: The Hottest Thing a Man Can Do Is Not Be a Jerk About Astrology


He already admitted his animal cruelty comment was sarcasm, even though it should not have been necessary. Its no wonder ya'll keep thinking Babylon Bee is a real news source.

Metaphor is the one who tends to use some pretty sketchy sources. Which I sometimes point out.

The fact that at least one poster here took Metaphor's fake confession about animal torture seriously maybe says something about Metaphor's posts.

I will make one last attempt to try to convince male posters:

This thread is not about whether or not astrology is real and should be taken seriously. It's about whether not taking women seriously will earn you the respect, affection or place in bed with a woman. Hint: It doesn't. Unless you're talking about someone with such terrible self esteem that she's willing to have sex with someone who thinks she's stupid. And that, my friends, says more about you than it does about her.

I think Nick Offerman said it most succinctly as "Jesus = Sex".

By respecting and not being an aggressive shit about minor woo in people's lives, you tend to have better relationships and get laid more often.

I don't have time for people who are going to decide we aren't compatible because chunks of rock (or gas) in space are in an arbitrary position, or talk at length about how that impacts how I act today without any suggestion of mechanism or engine driving those relationships.

On the other hand, I have all the time for someone who gets me high as balls on a clear night to go stargazing and staring at the celestial geometries.

The fact is, yes, it's fucking hot when a guy just rolls with it. Just don't make any attempts to get me to buy or care about horoscopes, and we're good.

If I were to be dating a guy, a first date drop would be that I am, in fact, a wizard. If they say "I don't believe in magic" and start trying to flex on me with their disbelief in magic, well, they already expressed a disbelief that we could make magic happen together.

Some elements of human existence require impulse, insanity, and strange belief. One of the elements that requires such madness is "romance". Some people just don't want to accept that, I guess. Their loss.
 
No, you don't understand. Astrology isn't just a silly interest. It is profoundly stupid. Like believing in Santa Claus. If a grown man believed in Santa Claus, that would be stupid. And that wouldn't be deserving of respect. I don't find sports particlarly engaging, so I understand men stereotypically have interests that are silly. And actually, I know I have interests that many women find silly or stupid - they tell me Toni. But that is not the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy. I'm sorry.

Personally, I think it is rude to call Astrology "stupid." That both underestimates it's insidiously subtle characteristics and insults it's practitioners, who are for the most part, just typical humans.

Astrology encourages magical thinking, but there is no wish fulfillment in Astrology the way there is in other magical fascinations like religion. And the last time I checked, out of 7.8 billion people on the planet, 6.7 billion are religious. I have a lot of tolerance for religious people and I see no reason to not extend that tolerance to Astrology enthusiasts. Furthermore, it is a little disingenuous to compare Astrology to Santa and Tooth Fairy belief. Astrology makes no promises and can't be verified by simple experimentation. When the Tooth Fairy fails to exchange a tooth, kids notice and tell each other at school. Tooth Fairy belief is damaged or nullified almost instantly. When Astrology tells you to be open to making new friends on Tuesday, but you don't make a new friend, it doesn't actually impeach Astrology. Disproving Astrology is far more difficult than disproving Santa, it is even more difficult than disproving most religions.

Like it or not, (I choose Not) Magical thinking is a major aspect of normal human life for nearly all humans throughout history and is still a significant aspect to 85% of humans today. That doesn't mean these people deserve insults.

You seem to be confusing respect for people who believe some silly things with respecting those silly things. I can certainly respect someone who believes in astrology (unless it rules their lives) even though I think astrology is nonsense. There are many other aspects of a person that merit respect. However, if they can't handle an honest conversation about astrology and accept that I disagree then that is a different matter. I have some religious friends, I have some new age friends. They all know my opinion on such things because we have openly discussed them. Since we know each other's position, we don't need to discuss such things and can enjoy common interests. Reasonable adults don't take disagreement over world views as a personal attack like the writer of the article in the OP.
 
This is so far out of my wheelhouse, it's like shuffling my thoughts to make a comment on string quartets, The Young and the Restless, or basketball playoffs. I just don't pay attention. Still, peripherally, I wonder:
1) Astrology is still around? The two papers I read don't carry an astrology column, unless I'm blind to it.
2) Astrology fandom skews toward women? Didn't know.
3) Astrology still has social conveyance, these days? I haven't heard anyone talk astrology, even satirically, for decades. As for bringing it up mystically, and going into the 'charts', maybe since around 1971.
4) Hence, where is the annoyance coming from? On an irritation scale, I'd give astrology a 1 or 2. It might even be diverting to hear someone theorize on it, sort of like finding a person who collects Chia Pets or Juice Newton in the original vinyl. And I'd much, much prefer to hear someone blather on astrology than to hear a sermonette on Jesus or a claim that someone's cat can read human minds. Got my limits.
 
View attachment 29506

This is the writer of the article.

Just to add to what I said earlier, if she's my date, then I'm taking her beliefs in astrology seriously. I literally, actually am.

Imagined conversation:

Her: 'What's your birthday?'
Me: 'April 27th, why'?
Her: 'A Taurus.'
Me: 'Yes, and you?'

This is not dating rocket science, guys. :)

Exactly. There is the self interest part (see ruby sparks above) and then there's just human kindness. If you feel that you must discount another person because they hold some irrational belief that you don't share, then it seems to me that speaks of arrogance and ignorance. We all hold irrational beliefs that others do not.

OK, so a guy can play along for the sake of keeping the peace, but if the relationship continues for some length of time, won't there at some point be a time when the house of cards has to collapse? And he's likely to get a mouthful of vitriol for being deceptive through out the relationship, will he not?

Kinda reminds of the time I was dating a girl I really liked. She was cute, shapely, down to earth, outdoorsy and easy going...stuff I like. She liked country music, however, and it was not my thing. And in fact, I had a long history joking with friends about country music and their fans. But, I didn't let on that I wasn't a fan and would engage in small talk with her about it (as much as I could get away with anyway). One time she told me she went to see country music star Tracy Byrd over the weekend with one of her girl friends. Like the supporting dumbass I was, I said, "Oh yeah, I like her...she's really great!". She gave me a cold stare and said, "Tracy Byrd is a guy!". After some discussion, I finally had to admit I knew next to nothing about CM, and that I had been playing along the whole time. She was not happy. So there's that.
 
No more so than anyone obsessing over every play by the Packers.

No. Obsessing with a sport or a show or a celebrity or any similar thing is not the same as believing in astrology. Those interests do not involve bizarre metaphysical beliefs.
As long as the beliefs do not cause real harm, I don't see why anyone makes such a distinction.
 
You're not taking it seriously. You are pretending to.

Well, I would say I'm taking the fact that she believes it seriously, even if not the validity of astrology itself. Not entirely unlike, say, a doctor treating a patient with delusions, but also not like that. But, whatever.
 
View attachment 29506

This is the writer of the article.

Just to add to what I said earlier, if she's my date, then I'm taking her beliefs in astrology seriously. I literally, actually am.

Imagined conversation:

Her: 'What's your birthday?'
Me: 'April 27th, why'?
Her: 'A Taurus.'
Me: 'Yes, and you?'

This is not dating rocket science, guys. :)

Exactly. There is the self interest part (see ruby sparks above) and then there's just human kindness. If you feel that you must discount another person because they hold some irrational belief that you don't share, then it seems to me that speaks of arrogance and ignorance. We all hold irrational beliefs that others do not.

OK, so a guy can play along for the sake of keeping the peace, but if the relationship continues for some length of time, won't there at some point be a time when the house of cards has to collapse? And he's likely to get a mouthful of vitriol for being deceptive through out the relationship, will he not?

Kinda reminds of the time I was dating a girl I really liked. She was cute, shapely, down to earth, outdoorsy and easy going...stuff I like. She liked country music, however, and it was not my thing. And in fact, I had a long history joking with friends about country music and their fans. But, I didn't let on that I wasn't a fan and would engage in small talk with her about it (as much as I could get away with anyway). One time she told me she went to see country music star Tracy Byrd over the weekend with one of her girl friends. Like the supporting dumbass I was, I said, "Oh yeah, I like her...she's really great!". She gave me a cold stare and said, "Tracy Byrd is a guy!". After some discussion, I finally had to admit I knew next to nothing about CM, and that I had been playing along the whole time. She was not happy. So there's that.

Sure, there's that. And then there's simply allowing the other person to have their own interests that you don't happen to share.

I've mentioned that my husband's major academic field of interest was not at all interesting to me. I actually just edited myself because early in our relationship, it was of zero interest to me and in fact, we had major arguments about the validity of some of the principles of his field. My field, biology, is also of little interest to him and in fact, if I talk about the blood and guts of things, he still gets a little green around the gills, so to speak. But over the years, I've become relatively conversant with many of the principles of his field and he, in turn, actually knows what his medical tests mean or, if he doesn't, how to look it up and will check with me. We've even found some overlap in how our disciplines view things.

More colloquially, our music tastes really do differ. He grew up listening to classical music and opera and I grew up hearing a lot of country western music. Neither of us much likes the music we grew up with--we are much more rock fans, as are most of our generation--but very different types of rock. He also likes jazz, which I've come to appreciate if sticking to more classical rather than experimental jazz. But there's a pretty narrow overlap of what we both like and enjoy.

He likes baseball and soccer. I'm not at all interested, although I did pick up some soccer when our kids played and can have a general conversation with Americans (who generally don't know much about soccer) without being complete idiot.

I love literature and art and going to museums and photography and science. He likes.. history and mysteries for recreational reading.

He's a city boy, through and through. I grew up in a small town, with my parents the first generation off of the farm and both sets of grandparents and my favorite aunt and uncle still on the farm (although all have passed and none of the cousins followed the tradition).

You'd think we have nothing at all in common or to talk about, but we do. I used to have to work very hard at not showing my eye rolls whenever he and his buddies got together to watch/discuss sports or worse: their shared field of study. He used to make fun of my soap opera watching habits (it helped me keep track of the time when I was doing laundry in the building next door). Oddly enough, I know a bit about the sports he likes and his field of expertise. Stranger still, he knows a bit about the soaps I watched(decades ago) (that my mother and grandmother also watched) and notices when one of the actors shows up in a Law and Order episode.

We don't pretend to like something the other person likes. We also don't ridicule each other (beyond a little fond teasing now and then) for the stupid things the other person likes or did like. And yes, I am equating soaps with baseball.

The point is that we like each other as people, which is far beyond what interests we share. Sure, there's the sex part and at this point in our shared lives, a lot of shared history. But we genuinely like each other. After all, we both dated other people and were sexually attracted to/active with other people before we started seeing one another. On paper, maybe some of those people would have been better matches. But they weren't. On my side, those other guys, with whom I shared more of the same taste in music and literature and who grew up more similarly to the way I grew up---well, it was just not something that was going to work out.

As I write this, I think of my closest friends and realize that while there are a few shared interests and at this point in our lives, a lot of shared history, we also like many and very different things. Yes, there's the shared history that means we don't have to go through hours and hours of backstory: we know each other. But honestly, they're really good people, who are smart and funny and kind--and we don't get nearly enough time together but when we do, it's hours and hours and hours of conversation. We can be open and honest with one another, without fear of being judged silly or bad or wrong--and we trust each other to call us out on our shit--and let's face it. All of us have shit that we need to be called out on. We like each other and we trust each other. We know each other. Really, really know each other, warts and all.

When I think of when these friendships formed, I know that there were other friends with whom one could argue I had much more in common--yet it is these very different friends with whom I bonded. Not because we are so alike or because we share the same interests or perspectives. But because we like and trust each other.
 
No, you don't understand. Astrology isn't just a silly interest. It is profoundly stupid. Like believing in Santa Claus. If a grown man believed in Santa Claus, that would be stupid. And that wouldn't be deserving of respect. I don't find sports particlarly engaging, so I understand men stereotypically have interests that are silly. And actually, I know I have interests that many women find silly or stupid - they tell me Toni. But that is not the same as believing in the Tooth Fairy. I'm sorry.

Personally, I think it is rude to call Astrology "stupid." That both underestimates it's insidiously subtle characteristics and insults it's practitioners, who are for the most part, just typical humans.

Astrology encourages magical thinking, but there is no wish fulfillment in Astrology the way there is in other magical fascinations like religion. And the last time I checked, out of 7.8 billion people on the planet, 6.7 billion are religious. I have a lot of tolerance for religious people and I see no reason to not extend that tolerance to Astrology enthusiasts. Furthermore, it is a little disingenuous to compare Astrology to Santa and Tooth Fairy belief. Astrology makes no promises and can't be verified by simple experimentation. When the Tooth Fairy fails to exchange a tooth, kids notice and tell each other at school. Tooth Fairy belief is damaged or nullified almost instantly. When Astrology tells you to be open to making new friends on Tuesday, but you don't make a new friend, it doesn't actually impeach Astrology. Disproving Astrology is far more difficult than disproving Santa, it is even more difficult than disproving most religions.

Like it or not, (I choose Not) Magical thinking is a major aspect of normal human life for nearly all humans throughout history and is still a significant aspect to 85% of humans today. That doesn't mean these people deserve insults.

Yeah, you are wrong. Astrology is stupid, and if you believe in it, you are stupid. Your argument amounts to "it's insulting". Well, are you arguing that it is not possible for something to be stupid? Because it will inevitably be insulting to someone. Perhaps, that is what you are arguing?

But you are wrong. Astrology makes all sorts of claims, most of which are verifiably wrong, all of which require high degrees of gullibility to believe. It is cruel, perhaps, to belabor the point. But it is, in fact, stupid.

Just saying they are typical humans, well, then typical humans are stupid.
 

He already admitted his animal cruelty comment was sarcasm, even though it should not have been necessary. Its no wonder ya'll keep thinking Babylon Bee is a real news source.

Was it really sarcasm though? Or was saying it was sarcasm a desperate attempt to walk it back?

No, it was clearly sarcasm.
 

He already admitted his animal cruelty comment was sarcasm, even though it should not have been necessary. Its no wonder ya'll keep thinking Babylon Bee is a real news source.

Metaphor is the one who tends to use some pretty sketchy sources. Which I sometimes point out.

The fact that at least one poster here took Metaphor's fake confession about animal torture seriously maybe says something about Metaphor's posts.

I will make one last attempt to try to convince male posters:

This thread is not about whether or not astrology is real and should be taken seriously. It's about whether not taking women seriously will earn you the respect, affection or place in bed with a woman. Hint: It doesn't. Unless you're talking about someone with such terrible self esteem that she's willing to have sex with someone who thinks she's stupid. And that, my friends, says more about you than it does about her.

That's fine, Toni. I find it pretty astounding that you are encouraging the sorts of toxic male behavior where dudes pretend to take a girl seriously just to sleep with her. I know lots of guys like that. And yeah, they probably do get laid more often.

I've never found that approach to be particularly honorable and have always found it to be inherently slimy. The only worse strategy is the "make her believe you love her" strategy. I think that one is just plain psychopathic. Although, it is very effective.

But I am able to find enough women who aren't idiots and don't believe in astrology to sleep with. So, thanks for your advice but no thanks.
 
OK, so a guy can play along for the sake of keeping the peace, but if the relationship continues for some length of time, won't there at some point be a time when the house of cards has to collapse?
Well, if you 'play along,' you're tge one thgat got yourself into that corner. You have to either admit it was a lie, or concoct a bigger lie to explain your change of attitude to NOT playing along.

Or, you can, from the start, simply say, honestly, "I was never much into (fill in the blank)." That can be astrology, Catholicism, politics, romantic comefies, musicals, vegetarian meals, 17th Century French philosophy, Neil Simon...

Then both of you can either respect the interest or disinterest, or make it a sticking point. But i think lies are going to be much more of a point than the honest disinterest.
 
OK, so a guy can play along for the sake of keeping the peace, but if the relationship continues for some length of time, won't there at some point be a time when the house of cards has to collapse?
Well, if you 'play along,' you're tge one thgat got yourself into that corner. You have to either admit it was a lie, or concoct a bigger lie to explain your change of attitude to NOT playing along.

Or, you can, from the start, simply say, honestly, "I was never much into (fill in the blank)." That can be astrology, Catholicism, politics, romantic comefies, musicals, vegetarian meals, 17th Century French philosophy, Neil Simon...

Then both of you can either respect the interest or disinterest, or make it a sticking point. But i think lies are going to be much more of a point than the honest disinterest.

Yep.
 
Metaphor is the one who tends to use some pretty sketchy sources. Which I sometimes point out.

The fact that at least one poster here took Metaphor's fake confession about animal torture seriously maybe says something about Metaphor's posts.

I will make one last attempt to try to convince male posters:

This thread is not about whether or not astrology is real and should be taken seriously. It's about whether not taking women seriously will earn you the respect, affection or place in bed with a woman. Hint: It doesn't. Unless you're talking about someone with such terrible self esteem that she's willing to have sex with someone who thinks she's stupid. And that, my friends, says more about you than it does about her.

That's fine, Toni. I find it pretty astounding that you are encouraging the sorts of toxic male behavior where dudes pretend to take a girl seriously just to sleep with her. I know lots of guys like that. And yeah, they probably do get laid more often.
It does seem that there are more women who prefer men who are patronizing and manipulative over men who are open and honest. As such, men who patronize get laid more... but honest men still get laid because there are plenty women who prefer honesty.
 
Metaphor is the one who tends to use some pretty sketchy sources. Which I sometimes point out.

The fact that at least one poster here took Metaphor's fake confession about animal torture seriously maybe says something about Metaphor's posts.

I will make one last attempt to try to convince male posters:

This thread is not about whether or not astrology is real and should be taken seriously. It's about whether not taking women seriously will earn you the respect, affection or place in bed with a woman. Hint: It doesn't. Unless you're talking about someone with such terrible self esteem that she's willing to have sex with someone who thinks she's stupid. And that, my friends, says more about you than it does about her.

That's fine, Toni. I find it pretty astounding that you are encouraging the sorts of toxic male behavior where dudes pretend to take a girl seriously just to sleep with her. I know lots of guys like that. And yeah, they probably do get laid more often.

I've never found that approach to be particularly honorable and have always found it to be inherently slimy. The only worse strategy is the "make her believe you love her" strategy. I think that one is just plain psychopathic. Although, it is very effective.

But I am able to find enough women who aren't idiots and don't believe in astrology to sleep with. So, thanks for your advice but no thanks.

Personally, I've never enjoyed sex without the respect and affection part but that's me. There are plenty of people, male and female, who report that they're only out for the sex. Whether or not that is toxic is, I suppose, a matter of opinion. I'm not advocating for anything, other than mutual respect, which can and generally does involve agreeing to disagree about country music, horoscopes, the world series, soap operas, heavy metal, jazz, Superbowl Sunday, etc.

I'm pretty sure if I had suggested that everyone need to fall in with me and require mutual respect and affection to be part of the package, you or someone else would have attacked me as being judgey and uptight and all kinds of things.

Editing to add: I am NOT suggesting that anyone PRETEND to respect anyone else's likes and dislikes. I am suggesting that people who respect other people's RIGHT TO THEIR OWN LIKES AND DISLIKES HOWEVER RIDICULOUS THAT SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT FIND THEM are more likely to be able to find willing sex partners and in general to be happier people.

I find people who judge others on the basis of what irrational hobby/belief set they hold (providing it does not involve harm to others) to be small minded, ignorant and in general, not very nice people
 
Metaphor is the one who tends to use some pretty sketchy sources. Which I sometimes point out.

The fact that at least one poster here took Metaphor's fake confession about animal torture seriously maybe says something about Metaphor's posts.

I will make one last attempt to try to convince male posters:

This thread is not about whether or not astrology is real and should be taken seriously. It's about whether not taking women seriously will earn you the respect, affection or place in bed with a woman. Hint: It doesn't. Unless you're talking about someone with such terrible self esteem that she's willing to have sex with someone who thinks she's stupid. And that, my friends, says more about you than it does about her.

That's fine, Toni. I find it pretty astounding that you are encouraging the sorts of toxic male behavior where dudes pretend to take a girl seriously just to sleep with her. I know lots of guys like that. And yeah, they probably do get laid more often.
It does seem that there are more women who prefer men who pander to and miniplate them over men who are open and honest. As such, men who pander get laid more... but honest men still get laid because there are plenty women who prefer honesty.

I think there's a lot of confirmation bias and self selection going on in this post.^^
 
This thread reminds me that humans take themselves way too seriously yo. If the human species was to vanish, Astrology; masculinity; feminism; republicans; demarcates; Bloods; Crips & sexual orientation as we've all come to understand it (regardless of view) would vanish right along with us.

But to offer my opinion on the topic. In feminism, the hottest thing a man can do is treat women as equals and the hottest thing women can do is shut up, make me a sandwich plus keep both my whiskey and Kool-Aid glass full. Calm down I'm kidding; treat men as equals. Just because there are folks out there that don't understand this simple concept doesn't mean it's up for debate. Though one is welcome from reasonable folks (unlike the OP).
 
It does seem that there are more women who prefer men who pander to and miniplate them over men who are open and honest. As such, men who pander get laid more... but honest men still get laid because there are plenty women who prefer honesty.

I think there's a lot of confirmation bias and self selection going on in this post.^^

If you read back over your posts, you will see that it was you that advocated pretending interest in things that you consider stupid as a way to get laid.
 
Metaphor is the one who tends to use some pretty sketchy sources. Which I sometimes point out.

The fact that at least one poster here took Metaphor's fake confession about animal torture seriously maybe says something about Metaphor's posts.

I will make one last attempt to try to convince male posters:

This thread is not about whether or not astrology is real and should be taken seriously. It's about whether not taking women seriously will earn you the respect, affection or place in bed with a woman. Hint: It doesn't. Unless you're talking about someone with such terrible self esteem that she's willing to have sex with someone who thinks she's stupid. And that, my friends, says more about you than it does about her.

That's fine, Toni. I find it pretty astounding that you are encouraging the sorts of toxic male behavior where dudes pretend to take a girl seriously just to sleep with her. I know lots of guys like that. And yeah, they probably do get laid more often.

I've never found that approach to be particularly honorable and have always found it to be inherently slimy. The only worse strategy is the "make her believe you love her" strategy. I think that one is just plain psychopathic. Although, it is very effective.

But I am able to find enough women who aren't idiots and don't believe in astrology to sleep with. So, thanks for your advice but no thanks.

Ruby's POV skeeves me out a bit. But it's not "playing along" to recognize that they have beliefs you don't share and just be ok with that. There isn't anything ultimately destructive behind believing in some causal adjacency between stars, planets, and behaviors.

For this woman, she thinks it's romantic when a guy just keeps his mouth shut about beliefs he may not share. The reverse should also be true. Anyone I date, for romance to exist, must at least accept that I believe I am a wizard and not tease me about that, and accept occasional bouts of insanity spewing from my mouth on the subject. I could (but afaik won't have to, owing to my current relationship) accept discussion of astrology coming from someone else, provided they didn't gush about some product or column; I'm not going to say no to some discussion of historical thaumaturgical beliefs. It's a nice rabbit hole to jump into for a month or two. It's something fun to know about.

Edit: I figured it out, why it skeeves me out wrt Ruby: it implies a leveraging of an informational asymmetry. It implies action with tainted consent.

Edit2: I still wouldn't consider it the death of romance if someone said they didn't buy my wizard schtick, but the sex was just too GD good to make an issue out of it. Good sex has a magic all its own.
 
Ruby's POV skeeves me out a bit.

I'm not being entirely serious in a couple of my posts. :)

My actual approach would be to not trash my date's beliefs in astrology. I might, I think, politely say that I don't subscribe to them (or I might not if it was just a passing comment) and I would not fall out with her about it (on a first date) but it might make me feel that she and I are not, er, destined to spend the rest of our lives together. That said, it's not necessarily a deal-breaker. I am, for example, currently dating and hoping to continue dating for a very long time (and possibly spend the rest of my life with, if it works out and she'll have me) a woman who has somewhat similar beliefs (they're more of the 'guardian angel' or 'benevolent higher reality' sort) because (a) there are so many other great things about her and (b) she's not strongly committed to the beliefs, she just likes them. She calls it 'having an open mind' and says it helps her retain a positive, optimistic view of life. She doesn't mind me teasing her good-humouredly a little bit about it, and she teases me back.

However, I do think the article is at least a bit silly.
 
Ruby's POV skeeves me out a bit.

I'm not being entirely serious in a couple of my posts. :)

My actual approach would be to not trash my date's beliefs in astrology. I might, I think, politely say that I don't subscribe to them (or I might not if it was just a passing comment) and I would not fall out with her about it (on a date) but it might make me feel that she and I are not, er, destined to spend the rest of our lives together. That said, it's not necessarily a deal-breaker. I am, for example, currently dating and hoping to continue dating for a very long time, a woman who has somewhat similar beliefs (they're more of the 'guardian angel' or 'benevolent higher reality' sort) because (a) there are so many other great things about her and (b) she's not strongly committed to the beliefs, she just likes them. She calls it 'having an open mind' and that it helps her retain a positive, optimistic view of life. She doesn't mind me teasing her good-humouredly a little bit about it, and she teases me back.

However, I do think the article is at least a bit silly.

That's a fairly healthy position to take, yeah. But like, the OP trying to paint feminism raw by linking it to a feminist expressing a perfectly acceptable requirement for her, and perhaps many other people's romantic interests. I've known plenty of guys for whom it would be romantic to not be a dick about it too.

It makes me doubt whether Metaphor truly understands romance in the first place?
 
Back
Top Bottom