It might be true that a “minority of men who are a real problem” but there’s also a minority of allies. I think the largest segment of men just go with the flow. They’ll laugh at a sexist joke if the majority are laughing or stay silent if the majority stay silent. I’ve seen some real allies shut down misogynistic comments here on Lemmy, and it’s really heartening. They get downvoted for it, but they shut down the circle jerk. I think it’s because they’re men signaling disapproval. The other guys might not like it, but they listen. I think Gen Z will not be quite as progressive as I was hoping, but I’m really hoping the next gen will tip us over the edge and we’ll hit a critical mass of allies so that men are less confident being openly misogynistic.

I had a somewhat similar conversation with some friends recently about early relationships and boundaries.

I had a boyfriend that didn’t take a no early in our relationship. I first just indicated no silently (moving hand away etc), then indicated no verbally, and he still tried to do something to me physically that I just expressed no about. I’m really proud that I stuck to my boundaries and got up and left, but that could have gone very differently. He was much bigger and stronger, and had I not known him through certain circles I might not know how he would react to me leaving. I was previously SAd and had done a lot of work building up my confidence and boundaries and he was not very experienced. He later sincerely apologized. He was legitimately confused about the situation and thought he was doing what he should. We had multiple extensive conversations about enthusiastic consent and eventually resumed dating. He was always good about consent from that point forward, but he essentially used my body as a learning experience. I’m glad it happened to me and not someone else, and I’m glad we had the conversation we did because now he knows for any future partners, but it really is scary to think how entitled he felt to my body and that there are other people out there like that.

There are several things people learn when just starting out dating, and I’m sure I messed up a lot and said things I shouldn’t have or said things wrong, but I never took liberties with someone’s body. Obviously, it happens to all kinds of people, by all kinds of people, but on the whole it seems like it’s heavily related to socialization. I think we need to do a better job of teaching consent and boundaries to all children. That and kindness. I think more of that and we’d stop mistreating our partners, because it ends up just being a microcosm of how we treat society.

Hey girl, this is your friend speaking. Leave him. I promise, the person you’re meant to be with will make noises so cute you’ll regret every second spent not hearing them.

You deserve better than to be with someone who is by your own admission “not a good partner”. Choose loving yourself.

I think you bring up a good point that most people likely have hormone cycles. We had a trans member of the community make a post recently regarding how they are experiencing period like symptoms and that other trans women have also experienced cyclical period like symptoms. I think a there’s a lot of variety in the human experience and my biggest issue is when people don’t recognize these differences as valid. It’s so important that we recognize that we’re more alike than different, but everyone faces their own unique issues and I like to leave a lot of space for that.

Sorry to hear about your PCOS, but glad you’ve got the diagnosis and seem to have gotten a handle on what sounded like some bad periods.

My app does not show the text in the post, so just in case, the post should say:

I would not venture into the comment section, but I think the post brings up a point for discussion. Menstruation is different for everyone (some women don’t/can’t some men do etc), so I figured I’d ask here what your relationship to it is and how you see other people relate to it. I personally think there’s something very unique to menstruation itself that I would not relate to anything else, having experienced things far more and far less painful or affecting, but I know that’s not how everyone views it. Having said that, I think there’s a lot of discussion around women’s periods and I understand the desire to relate to them regardless of your personal experience with them. I would love to hear your individual perspectives on how you talk about your cycles to people, or if you do so at all, and how their responses affect your desire to talk to them about that going forward.

I have a friend that like me has had medical issues arise because of their cycle, and though we’ve had similar experiences I am least likely to bring up my experiences when she’s talking about hers because I want to give her feelings as much space as possible. She does the same with me. I’m not sure if it’s like that for others, but I think the more severe the issue the more likely I am to verbalize sympathy than empathy. On the other hand, I can pretty casually talk about it with some friends who have a more average experience with them. I’m least likely to talk about it with my male friends, but I have some close ones that I will mention it to and they always step up their support if I bring it up, since I mostly bring it up if I’m noticing I need some extra support. Because of the way my cycle affects me, and maybe because I am really lucky, my partners have been mostly really good about recognizing it and offering support when needed.

I read the article and it seems to be just an excuse to rightly clown on RFK jr and these two women, offering very little in the way of substance.

I’d be interested in a real examination of the topic, but I imagine it’d just yield exactly what we expect. Immoral people find immoral people alluring. Possibly even enjoy surrounding themselves with people worse than themselves so they can feel good or exhilarate and delight in a level of immorality they could not have conceived of alone.

This comment links to the article: https://lemmus.org/comment/15733715

Seems I’m a bit late to the post, but it’s so validating to see others with the same issue. My partner and I were in the same position and I tried literally everything. Don’t let society or others judge what works best for you. We ended up doing separate meals that we prepare ourselves and that works great for us. It makes bulk shopping less practical, but I feel so much better now and it was just an unnecessary point of friction in our relationship. As far as the love language thing, I second the other commenter suggesting baked goods. Alternatively, once a week designated meal that you make that’s her choice or maybe even just a breakfast on a day you both can do a leisurely breakfast together.

I think that would be great actually. Destigmatizing sex toys for women is still a work in progress even with sex toy brands being as pervasive as they are. I think it’d be interesting to have some recommendations from real women who have nothing to gain from steering you one way or another. I don’t personally use them, so I don’t have much to add to the conversation, but I think it might help someone.

Interesting read! I am a little amused that they used a handful of examples to make their point and then waived away what little “scientific” data we have on the topic, despite opening by stating people tend to agree with things that support their preconceived notions.

I personally think it is interesting to know, just for the sake of knowing, and though I understand some people deem it a value judgement, I don’t think it has to be. It’s ok if men and women, on average, think differently, it’s ok if that’s learned or innate. It’s also ok if they don’t. I just think knowing would shed light on humanity regardless.

I thought this was a good quote though:

he was, as Nichols drily observes, ‘eight and a half times more successful than me at writing the same book’.

Thank you for your suggestions!

Please reply to this comment with suggestions for next month. One suggestion per reply please!

I know we’re supposed to avoid politics here, but I think it’s maybe politically neutral to at least say that people, especially from minority groups, should at least be engaged in politics, and the following quote closes out the article: When pressed further for her thoughts about President Donald Trump praising her, Sweeney responded that she was not monitoring the situation closely.

Rose (a member of the LGBT community) was passed over to play an LGBT woman. She was replaced with someone who is not LGBT and has not said anything to defend the community (that I’ve seen) and seems to court approval from people who are anti that community.

I don’t think I would have made that statement, certainly not in that way, but it’s the responsibility of people who have a voice to call out others in their community who do harm. Rose is using her platform to call attention to a woman she perceives as not supporting other woman and her community. I think not being able to call other women out just because they also face misogyny is not the answer. I think it’s always ok to call out the Anita Bryant’s of the world. I do think it should have been done differently, but I’m not going to police the language of people experiencing oppression and expressing their frustration.

Though as a general statement, people should uplift one another is not a bad worldview.

It’s not for me personally, but if both parties have discussed and agreed upon the next step ahead of time, I can see it being romantic. I’m sure there are cases where it’s done specifically for the coercive force, but I wouldn’t write off the whole idea. If a couple met at or bonded over a sporting event, I can see how a proposal at a game would be special. It’s not my taste, but to each their own in my opinion.

Thank you! 💖

Please post suggestions for next month as a reply to this comment. One suggestion per comment please, but feel free to comment multiple times.

Herland

Overall this was a good read in my opinion. It lulled a bit in the later half for me, but was pretty engaging throughout. It appealed to the luxury gay space communism I strive towards, so it was fun to get lost in that world and essentially have my idealized (I’m not in support of eliminating men obviously) worldview supported and explored by this author.

It was interesting to see that they still had a religion, but just had morphed it to fit their lifestyle. I know this is basically what people have done since the dawn of time, but in my ideal space communism, we don’t need religion or veneration. We all kinda just do what’s right because that’s what’s right. Also notable that virgin birth plays a role in their religion too. I understand the men were hesitant to provide a lot of details of their religion, but you’d think there’d be more exchange regarding that. There’s a lot to be said about the assumptions the men made regarding life after marriage. They didn’t explicitly say anything and are surprised when things don’t go exactly as they expected. Still extremely relatable unfortunately. I wonder if the author added the polygamous nature of the original society because she assumed the marriage tradition would be too deeply embedded in the culture to have fallen out of common knowledge.

I was surprised that a group that venerates motherhood would so readily move back to standard male/female breeding. What if they had a male child? Their whole religion and way of life revolves around the feminine motherhood in a way a male cannot directly engage in. It’s one thing for outsiders to feel excluded, it’s another for a male child to grow up in that. I’m sure he’d be doted on, but there’s something there that was not addressed. I feel as though if this was written by a male I’d assume that had a female written it it’d have been different. But here we are with a female writer envisioning a female only society excited to reintroduce random males into their essentially eugenicsed society. There was no explicit mention of women who were not interested in having children, but I believe they did reference some being unable to, so possibly the inability stems from an unwillingness, but I would have liked to see that addressed.

I am curious as to what happened with the local men that had previously attempted to seek Herland out. Strange that native people were potentially unable to traverse the cliff safely but these men were. Or were they just captured and executed ages ago and they haven’t tried in a long time? Sex, lesbianism, and physical pleasure are also never really mentioned, but I’ll just chalk that up to this being originally a serialized work and needing to adhere to some kind of propriety.

The paternalism of the state seemed to persist in the way that a small group seemed to be making the decisions as to what to do regarding the outside world. Maybe I missed a vote or something, but I would have preferred seeing the inhabitants making the decision to stay isolated, especially as it can be suggested to be the best outcome for their children.

Also interesting that they seemed to have spent a lot of time and likely resources in making a tree they found beautiful bear food. I liked that they had done away with a lot of frivolous personal aesthetics, but were willing to invest in something beautiful that would outlast them. It speaks to a collective interest in beauty that seemed to be a throughline in their way of live in lieu of an ownership of beauty.

I made some notes about the perspective on animals in the book. Nothing particularly coherent, but things like the elimination of predator species. The encouragement of the prey drive in cats since they prey on “pests”, but restricting them from hunting birds. They must have a large rodent population to feed all the cats since cats are obligate carnivores. They also mention the removal of invasive moths. Clearly some things must be sacrificed so that others can flourish, but I don’t think that’s even a big theme, just something of note.

A highlight for me was the centering of older women. They were written of with a lot of respect that I rarely see given to them. The direct acknowledgement of that was also nice. The protagonist explicitly realizing that his society often discards women like this felt like a turning point. They reference a specific kind of aunt-mothering that is part of the cultural consciousness but not often addressed. A lot of cultures use aunt as a term of respect or endearment and you see it used for women in positions of authority in societies like Gilead in the handmaids tale. I like that this shined a light on that position that a lot of women are put in, regardless of if they wanted to be there or not.

I do want to point out that the protagonist somewhat excuses his friend for attempting to rape his wife. I’m not sure if the rape excuse is a reflection of the author or their view on men and this particular mans inability to truly hold his friend accountable. There was also elements of eugenics, and referring to people as savages. It definitely shows its age.

Thelma & Louise

This was a very well written and acted movie, but I can’t say that I enjoyed it. Much of it felt like trauma porn, or as Dandelion aptly put it, an exploitation film. I’m glad it was made, and it is definitely true to much of the female experience, but it was tough to watch.

I understand that the sex scene with Brad Pitt was supposed to seem reclamatory at first, but even in the moment it felt bad to watch. This naive woman was obviously being played, even if he hadn’t taken anything from her, it would have felt like there was an element of him taking advantage of her situation. I understand she’s a grown woman, but it felt manipulative the whole time.

Some small details I really enjoyed were when they were talking about Louise’s eye color. Previously she had closed her eyes when she asked him. This time she covered his eyes. I don’t know if that was intentional or just the most convenient or aesthetic choice, but it seemed a subtle nod to her agency. I liked that the Jimmy farewell kiss was the back of her head and not the side view we often get. It wasn’t about the kiss itself, just about her as a person. It made the kiss feel more personal than had they shown it in more detail in my opinion. I also liked that they didn’t shy away from showing that Jimmy was a bit of a mixed bag. He was violent, and obviously not a great partner, but Louise still loved him and he was trustworthy to a certain extent. It’s nice to see complicated relationships on screen, even if I’d prefer them to not be the case.

Overall it felt like there is no good move for women. Naive and trusting or bold and protective, either will lead to trouble. That’s often what it feels like, but watching it play out like that made me feel more upset than seen. I’m not excusing murder, don’t go do that ladies, but it really felt like they were backed into a corner and ended up spiraling, and all of it, even their spiral, was rooted in men. Even the “good cop” hoping to “help them” ends up being the reason they get caught. If they hadn’t somewhat trusted him, they wouldn’t have called him and given away their location. I’m glad I saw it, but it will be a one time watch for me.

No hate, but I barely made it through the first half of the movie. I’m so surprised to hear it’s a favorite! It’s a technically good film, definitely, but it was so crushingly depressing. Maybe just the state of my country right now has me in a bad headspace, but watching it made me actually upset. Not in a triggering way, but angry. Maybe it was triggering, just in a different sense than I’d normally use it? I can’t imagine wanting to watch it again, but I’m glad we were able to watch a favorite of someone’s!

Great point about how even good men wanting to help can’t singlehandedly fight a system.