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

[ruby sparks]

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.

I re-read the article a few times and it wasn't quite as bad as it first seemed (though still bad, imo) and also, the same writer recently wrote an article for the same publication entitled "Domestic Abuse Against Men on the Rise Amid Pandemic", so she's not what I would call a radical feminist or an unreasonable person.

But yeah, the point the article is making could be made in a better way. In other words, she has a point.

Which is often what I think about metaphor's posts too.

 

[Toni]

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.

No, I never suggested anyone PRETEND anything. I said that people should respect the fact that other people have different beliefs and interests. And that will help you get laid. It will also help you have better relationships in general .

There is a difference between espousing a belief yourself and in respecting the RIGHT of someone else to hold that belief.

 

[Toni]

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.

This is the part of the article that I think is important:

In other words, men feel entitled to belittle and denigrate astrology for the same reason they feel entitled to belittle and denigrate anything else society has coded as “feminine” or otherwise related to women: because the very thread that holds a patriarchal society together is the fundamental — if now largely unspoken — belief that womanhood itself is inherently bad. Thus, anything of or related to women must, by extension, be foolish, frivolous, stupid or simply evil.

This is something I have noticed in many aspects of society, and in individuals and in the posts of some individual posters here on this forum.

Of course #NotAllMen.

 

[ruby sparks]

.... the very thread that holds a patriarchal society together is the fundamental — if now largely unspoken — belief that womanhood itself is inherently bad..

I can honestly say that I don't think I've ever known any man personally, even here, who believes that womanhood itself is inherently bad, and I'd be surprised if I ever do. So imo this is the sort of overstatement that I'd be dubious about. I'm sure such men exist. Probably. But #NotAllMen doesn't get it right, imo. #NotVeryManyMen perhaps.

This is not to say that there aren't much more common toxic attitudes, such as forms of sexism, but that a fundamental if now largely unspoken belief that womanhood itself being inherently bad is holding our patriarchal society together? Hm. Something is being overstated imo.

 

[skepticalbip]

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.

No, I never suggested anyone PRETEND anything.

True. I misquoted, my error. What you actually said is, "feign interest".

I said that people should respect the fact that other people have different beliefs and interests. And that will help you get laid. It will also help you have better relationships in general .

And as I posted a bit earlier, you are confusing respect for a person for respect for some world view they have that is silly. Respect for another would mean giving an honest opinion and trusting that they appreciate and can actually deal with honesty. My friends and I know, understand, and respect our different opinions. Unfortunately there are people who can not deal with someone disagreeing (does it damage their self esteem?). Disagreement does not mean denigration.

There is a difference between espousing a belief yourself and in respecting the RIGHT of someone else to hold that belief.

Where in the hell have I said that someone doesn't have the RIGHT to hold a belief? Just as they have the right to hold a belief, I have a right to not hold that belief. Those who don't understand this should be avoided. The OP author seems to demonize any man who would dare to openly disagree with some woman's belief.

 

[ruby sparks]

Note that the publication, InsideHook Newsletter, bills itself primarily as "News and advice for the most interesting man in the room". There are sections on sports, vehicles, gear (presumably clothing), personal tech and...wait for it...watches (nice expensive ones).

And there's a section on sex and dating advice. The sorts of things 'the most interesting man in the room' might find useful.

Imo, the article makes quite a few bad points. But the good one is, if you're a guy dating a woman, don't ruin the first date by trashing your date's personal beliefs, about astrology or whatever. The writer believes in astrology so that may partly explain why that's the particular belief being written about.

Try to see the whole woman.

Maybe then you'll actually get to see the whole woman later in the evening.

Kidding slightly in that last bit!

Oh and always flash the expensive watch.

 

[Derec]

Note that the publication, InsideHook Newsletter, bills itself primarily as "News and advice for the most interesting man in the room". There are sections on sports, vehicles, gear (presumably clothing), personal tech and...wait for it...watches (nice expensive ones).

And there's a section on sex and dating advice. The sorts of things 'the most interesting man in the room' might find useful.

What, no section on beer?

 

[Toni]

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.

Kinda they do.

 

[Toni]

To get back to the OP: what is really attractive is when someone is interested enough in YOU to listen to you talk about one of your nutty obsessions without eye rolling or judgement or derision. In other words: respect.

People who believe in astrology do not deserve respect for that belief. It is nonsense, dangerously stupid nonsense.

Doesn't it depend on how deep the belief runs?

Lots of people check their daily horoscopes and know what sign they are. Those daily horoscopes and horoscope profiles are so generalized and non-specific that almost anyone can find something of themselves in the profiles or take some 'wisdom' from the general platitudes and 'advice' from their daily or weekly or yearly or whatever horoscope. A much smaller subset of people will actually 'have their charts done' and/or use the horoscopes of their prospective romantic partners to look for 'signs' of compatibility or incompatibility with a romantic or prospective romantic partner. A much smaller subset of the previous one will to some degree use their horoscopes to 'guide' them (or confirm) decisions they make. And from there, it gets progressively weirder. A LOT Of teenage girls look at their horoscopes and the horoscopes of friends, boyfriends, family members. They're looking for insight into who they are, and how and why they relate to other people the way they do. Most outgrow it. Now, I'm really just talking about girls in the US. I know that many different Eastern cultures place a higher value in horoscopes, more likely Chinese horoscopes (maybe India has it's own??) or feng shui. And there's numerology, palmistry, etc. Back in my college days, I knew people who were conversant or more than conversant with all of these and a few who believed in them all to a certain extent. Only maybe one who actually used it to guide any aspect of their lives and that might have been the 'shrooms talking. IDK.

Lots of ball players (and fans) have their own set of superstitions about 'good luck' rituals or charms. I was knocking Packers fans but not really for this aspect of fandom. More for their obsession with believing that they know and understand more about the intricacies of the game than do the pros. And will fight you about this!

Anything can be dangerous. I remember reading about a man who died because he ate something like 5 lbs of carrots a day for years, leading to acute carotenosis. You can die from drinking too much water or from being too thin or too fat or whatever.

But clearly, if you cannot respect someone because they believe in (whatever), then you have no business trying to have even a transitory relationship with them.

 

[Toni]

No more so than anyone obsessing over every play by the Packers.

No, obsessing over some sports team doesn't require profound stupidity. It is nowhere near the same level.

Perhaps you haven't met truly obsessive fans. But agree to disagree.

I dated a girl who was in to ice dancing, watched all the championships. I had no problem watching these things with her or talking to her about this, even though I'm wasn't particularly interested in ice dancing. That would be comparable, although, I actually agree with you that football is harmful so really much worse in that sense. But believing in astrology is akin to believing in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus as an adult. It signals profound stupidity. It isn't a mere interest in some activity. In fact, I am amazed you feel you need to defend it. I have found there are plenty of women who aren't morons, so I see no reason to respect something so stupid to "get dates".

Then you have a selection criteria. We all do. Mine would include generally avoiding guys whose father was a minister or who considered the priesthood or becoming a clergyman of some sort. I would also not have wanted my daughter to have dated any of those. Or a wrestler. Or an alcoholic or drug addict. Or someone with a bad temper. Or someone who didn't like dogs or children. Or anyone who is not polite and generous with waitstaff.

 

[Toni]

True. I misquoted, my error. What you actually said is, "feign interest".

I said that people should respect the fact that other people have different beliefs and interests. And that will help you get laid. It will also help you have better relationships in general .

And as I posted a bit earlier, you are confusing respect for a person for respect for some world view they have that is silly. Respect for another would mean giving an honest opinion and trusting that they appreciate and can actually deal with honesty. My friends and I know, understand, and respect our different opinions. Unfortunately there are people who can not deal with someone disagreeing (does it damage their self esteem?). Disagreement does not mean denigration.

There is a difference between espousing a belief yourself and in respecting the RIGHT of someone else to hold that belief.

Where in the hell have I said that someone doesn't have the RIGHT to hold a belief? Just as they have the right to hold a belief, I have a right to not hold that belief. Those who don't understand this should be avoided. The OP author seems to demonize any man who would dare to openly disagree with some woman's belief.

I said that I *could* feign interest.

Look at it this way: You see an old friend you haven't seen for a while and he pulls out a phone full of photos of his grandchildren. Most of us are a little interested in the first few photos but after a half dozen or so, for most of us, our interest wains. But our interest in our friend does NOT wain. So, out of politeness, whether or not we like children or other peoples' children and grandchildren, we will behave as though we are interested---until the time and opportunity presents itself to change the subject. Insert car or dog or fish or whatever. You get the general idea.

It gets trickier if we have dear friends and family who hold religious or political beliefs which are vastly different than our own, especially these days. And yet, in one job, I worked directly with people from 7 or 8 different countries, and dealt with daily people from many other countries/cultures, with several different religions and first languages, where I was the minority English speaking white American. No one tried to convert anyone else and instead, we shared information about our belief systems, and how we arrived at them. And food. Lunches where people brought in leftovers from the previous night's dinner were marvelous.

And then: a year ago, I attended a high school reunion--deep in Trump country. Holding my breath all the time but politics was only referred to once, the entire time by someone who marveled at how I could manage to live up there with all them there lib'rals. But he had literally saved my life years ago so why go into details about why I was right and he was wrong?

 

[Metaphor]

Childhood and adolescent animal cruelty and subsequent interpersonal violence in adulthood: A review of the literature

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?

I can't even.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I know when I was a kid, I tortured and killed small animals,

This explains a lot.

You don't really think he was serious about that, do you??

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Guys, the issue isn't whether astrology is or is not to be taken seriously. It's about whether or not men should respect women who have interests that the men do not share or even find foolish.

It is about whether or not men are wise to judge women for believing or pursuing an interest in something that they themselves do not believe and are not interested in.

If you think that the devotion of some women to discussions about astrology is absurd and beyond the pale, please consider the on radio discussions of play by play Packers games by Packers fans. Or whatever your particular sport of interest is. Most women who are not similarly inclined to follow the Packers (and many, many ARE inclined to follow the Packers) do not enter into conversations with men to deride the male Packers' fans obsession. A few will but not smart ones. They make talk amongst themselves or amongst fellow non-devotees of the Packers about how stupid and obsessed Packers fans are but they don't do it at the dinner table with their Packers fan partner. Even I can feign interest in football (American or classic) and baseball and hockey. Surely you are all at least as smart as I am.

Football isn't quackery.

Believe in astrology? There won't be another date.

Like a sport I don't care about? No problem.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Personally, if I was attracted to an astrology-believing date (including the writer, who is quite hot, I googled), I would politely set my dislike of astrology aside until after we'd (hopefully) had a great time in bed back at my place. Then, in the morning, I would politely explain, over a breakfast that I would be willing to make, and without mentioning astrology, that I do not think we would be suitable relationship material for each other, thank her for the lovely encounter, and continue my search for someone to have an ongoing relationship with who is not into woo. Then I would tell my mates about this woo-head I'd met who was a great f**k. That's how much of a gentleman I am.

I wouldn't--things at this level make me lose interest in somebody. If I'm not interested in taking it further I'm not interested in taking them to bed, either.

 

[ideologyhunter]

So if yammering about astrology can be a deal-breaker, how does it rank with...
>smoking?
>chaos & clutter in home?
>talking to food (i.e."Ew, Mr. Apple, you have a brown spot") (Oops, that's Seinfeld)
>issues of Watchtower on bedside table?
>taking a call during sex?
>pet allowed in bedroom?
>2 or more pets allowed in bedroom?
>music presets are all Toby Keith?
>has MAGA vibrator with Trump's face on head?

 

[ruby sparks]

What, no section on beer?
View attachment 29516

There's a section on 'food and drink for the most interesting man in the room', so beers that make attractive younger women gaze into your not even fully-open eyes like that while a beta male looks on, are probably discussed in that section. The women are possibly both astrology-believers, and he is possibly in the middle of explaining why astrology is bunkum, but he likes the right beer and has probably flashed the expensive-watch-as-recommended-by-and-purchased-at-InsideHook already, so the women not only may not mind that he is trashing astrology, they may be thinking 'if this works out, maybe I should consider dropping this astrology thing, at least to his face.'.

 

[ruby sparks]

I know when I was a kid, I tortured and killed small animals,

This explains a lot.

You don't really think he was serious about that, do you??

I must admit I did too, at first. It wasn't initially clear.

 

[ruby sparks]

Football isn't quackery.

Believe in astrology? There won't be another date.

Like a sport I don't care about? No problem.

What if she wears a cheese-head to the dinner date?

 

[Metaphor]

You don't really think he was serious about that, do you??

I must admit I did too, at first. It wasn't initially clear.

Okay, I'm acutely aware that this thread isn't about me...but seriously?

When ZiprHead dishonestly quoted that snippet, I thought he was just being a douchebag and pretending my sarcastic words were an actual admission of serial-killer behaviour in my childhood. But now I find out he genuinely thought I was confessing to killing and torturing small animals.

Obviously, not all men who hate astrology are killers, but Reynolds’ argument seeks to highlight the insidious through line that unites seemingly casual displays of sexism and machismo to their horrific extremes — and it doesn’t just begin with the modern masculinity crisis as we know it today.

Then, to express how utterly and insanely stupid feminist thought trains are decoupled from reality, I mocked the implication that astrology hatred was associated with being a serial killer:

I know when I was a kid, I tortured and killed small animals, and then I read the astrology column so I could scoff at it.

And you are telling me it wasn't clear that I was mocking the article, but rather it seemed I was sincerely confessing to serial-killer behaviours as a child?

Perhaps it indicates something about the psychology of ZiprHead, and anyone else who thought serial-killing behaviour in childhood was totally something that a 'right winger' would do, and then also casually confess to doing, on a message board.