Feminism is ruining sexuality

[The Deacon]

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_9495/

For women, the shift in economic power gives them new choices, not least among them the ability to reappraise their partner. And husbands, for their part, may find to their chagrin that being financially dependent isn’t exactly a turn-on. According to psychologists (and divorce lawyers) who see couples struggling with such changes, many relationships follow the same pattern. First, the wife starts to lose respect for her husband, then he begins to feel emasculated, and then sex dwindles to a full stop.

Feminism is ruining sexuality. This is only part of the evidence. This also furthers the notion that women are attracted to males that fulfill their own gender roles, in this case that of a provider. Alpha males fulfill all of their gender roles, and women are only sexually attracted to males that exhibit traits of an alpha male.

As DJs, we need to be aware of this social phenomenon. Let's avoid being beta males and exhibit traits of an alpha male. Those traits include self-sufficiency, leadership, non-approval-seeking, and social value. Women are biologically programmed to be sexually attracted to males who exhibit those qualities. Looks contribute to sexual attractiveness as well, but not as much as those four aforementioned traits.

This also goes to show that no matter how much society changes, our sexual preference cannot change with it. Men are attracted to fertility, women are attracted to power, that's it.

 

[The Deacon]

When Emily comes home, she doesn’t always want to be the boss. But she says her husband no longer has the authority to take over. “I want somebody to take that power role away from me,” she explains. “Ultimately, it gets down to pretty basic stuff. It’s hard to be the power broker every day and then be the femme fatale. I’m not going to pay the bills—I feel like his mother—and then come home and suck his ****.”

The woman even said it herself. She wants to have a male authority over her so she can fulfill her gender roles.

 

[Yookiwooki]

OK, im sorry, but on SoSuave this argument has been ridden to the ground and beaten repeatedly like the dead horse it is.

Im all for equal rights between men and women, but on a sexual level, this incredibly exaggerated 'sameness' between men and women is a PEVERSION. Men and women are DIFFERENT, expecially sexually (duh); there is no way to argue against this.

But hey look on the bright side. If the majority of men are being emasculated, its not so hard to stand out anymore. We can take advantage of the situation by not being freakin pussies!

 

[The Deacon]

I posted this to give another example of how DJism is a very accurate depiction of sexuality's social dynamics.

I'm not stupid, Yookiwooki. This argument has had numerous evidences posted on this site. I don't appreciate your condescending comments. Next time, if you don't like the thread, just don't post in it.

 

[Lord Shinra]

But hey look on the bright side. If the majority of men are being emasculated, its not so hard to stand out anymore. We can take advantage of the situation by not being freakin pussies!

Well, the flip side to that is that women just dont respect men anymore. The ones who dont flake usually respect you once you show your masculinity, but you start from a disadvantage from the initial pickup.

 

[Maurizio 2.0]

I read the full article.

I get the article, and I understand it's truth. I know that men are supposed to be the powerful and dominant, and that that's where a lot of the attraction from a woman comes from.

But these women are those that plead for equality. And then they present men with such insulting hypocrisies:

These women admit that when they are the primary household earner that they feel as though the relationship with their spouse is like that of a child, and the husband is de-sexualized. So therefore when men are the primary earners, a woman's relationship to the man is that of his child. And this perversion is somehow ok!?

When one of these women hired a lawyer to deal with the divorce proceedings, the lawyer referred to the husband as 'a parasite.' I contend that it is not socially acceptable to refer to a woman in the reverse situation in the same manner. A lower earning woman going through divorce with a successful man would be horrifically insulted by such a term and would stand up for her non-quantifiable financial worth by citing her other duties around the house as 'priceless.'

I hope these men took half of their wive's assets in the divorce. It's only right.

Don't get me wrong. Women are still shafted in the workplace. Studies show that equally qualified women are paid only approximately 70 cents on the dollar that a man would in the same job. This is wrong.

I consider myself a feminist, because I'm for equal rights for both sexes. Unfortunately, many people out in the world who call themselves feminists naively think that the term means that a woman should be able to reap all the benefits of a male, and ignore many of the drawbacks. This is stupid.

Of course, the issue of equal rights as it applies to workplace compensation and equity shared in relationships is very complicated, in my opinion can never truly be equal, and is something that I don't have the motivation to get into further.