Inclusive Dating Liberals: You Should Date People You’re Not Attracted To Out of a Sense of Guilt or Duty (and which contradicts other liberal feminist views about women and dating)

Inclusive Dating Liberals: You Should Date People You’re Not Attracted To Out of a Sense of Guilt or Duty (and which contradicts other liberal feminist views about women and dating)

I saw this conversation on twitter earlier today. Someone I follow on Twitter re-tweeted one of the tweets, which is how I saw this.

Other than one of the people who re-tweeted this, I don’t think I know any of the participants in this conversation, or who is involved (not at first glance):

I do follow several left wing persons and news sites on my Twitter account.

I sometimes visit left wing sites that discuss politics, feminism, entertainment, and other subjects, so I am partially aware of some left wing causes, views, and so forth.

However, I don’t keep up with the minutia of it and all the nit picky details of all liberal pet causes. Therefore, I do not completely understand their rationale for some views, or all the jargon they use.

Nor do I think I care to learn it all in-depth, as I only have one life to live and would rather spend it doing things like watching repeats of Zombieland on cable and new episodes of Diners, Drive Ins, and Dives.

Apparently, the woman who started out that thread (named Claire) is a lesbian, if I am understanding things correctly.

Here is one of her tweets (link to tweet):

“Not taking transwomen as sexual partners doesn’t mean lesbians don’t consider TW worthy of respect, safety, kindness, friendship, etc.”

—end quote—

Claire went on to Tweet this in the same thread:

“And it is pressure. This insidious idea that if a lesbian won’t consider sleeping with someone, she must be a bigot, is insidious & coercive”

—end quote—

If I am understanding this correctly, she is saying that some people who support transgenderism are demanding that lesbians should date men who underwent some kind of sex change surgery or what have you to appear to be women (I think these persons are called transwomen? As I said, I don’t care to keep up with all the rhetoric of liberal causes and their terminology.)

I cannot agree with a view that says you should date or marry people with whom you are not the least attracted or that you have moral qualms about.

I covered this topic on a previous post on my blog:

I have never felt very attracted to white guys with red hair. According to liberal logic, however, this somehow means I hate gingers, and they would lecture me and insist I date red headed men, even though I really do not want to.

Now you understand I’m not in favor of people who are overly picky in other regards. Like this guy:

I’m fine with people having a few deal breakers or some base criteria in choosing romantic partners, but when it gets to the point that your “must have” list of qualities in a date or spouse is three feet long and consists of things such as…

  • any boyfriend of mine must have a pet goat named Elmer
  • Elmer the goat must have green fur with orange spots
  • any boyfriend of mine must have two thumbs on  his left hand
  • his favorite number must be 17.344 (but only on every third Sunday)
  • he must be exactly 6 feet 5 inches tall
  • he must have two sisters (one has to be named Eunice)
  • he must drive a 1976 Mustang
  • he must have a tattoo of television actor Harvey Korman on his right forearm

I mean, Hell No. You can certainly have a picky list like that if you want to, but good luck actually getting a person who meets all those incredibly picky specifications (you’re going to die single).

I find it ridiculous that some liberals are demanding that entire groups of people should have sex with certain individuals from certain other types or groups of people to be fair or “inclusive.”

Nobody owes you anything in life, certainly not when it comes to sex, dating, or romance.

One of my problems with some men – especially the ones who belong to the “men’s rights groups” or the young male virgins who go on violent rampages and shoot or stab women – is that these men have deeply ingrained entitlement mentalities towards the entire female gender.

These types of men feel as though they are OWED attention, sex, or dates from women, and in particular, women who are considered by them (and/or society) as being beautiful. Which usually boils down to women who are age 18 to 29, very slim, huge chests, and white.

When women in this desired group do not pay these men the time of day (they refuse to date these men for whatever reasons), the men either go on to forums and blogs to complain and spew sexism at women over being rejected, or some of them go insane or explode in rage and kill women.

Such as:

(Link): Bitter, Frustrated 22 Year Old Male Virgin and Member of Men’s Rights / PUA Groups Kills Several Women Because He Couldn’t Get Dates – what an entitled sexist doof

(Link):  A Teen Boy Tried To Kill Three Women “In Revenge” Because He Was A Virgin – felt that women “were the weaker” breed

(Link):  Chris Harper Mercer (Oregon Gunman) Angry Over Being Single and A Virgin

I do think one motive behind why these guys stab or shoot women is because they feel that the women they target for dating (again, who are usually women who are in their 20s, thin, conventionally attractive) owe them sex, dates, and/or relationships. They believe that because they are attracted to these women, that these women should give them a chance.

I remember when I was in my late 20s, I joined a few dating sites on a lark. I didn’t really want to meet any men via a site at that time, I mainly joined out of curiosity.

I had no intention of “leading anyone on,” I wanted to see what dating sites were like. Two of my co-workers at that time had joined dating sites and would talk to each other about it during work, so  I wanted to see what it was like.

After I had a profile set up on one or two dating sites, I was contacted by single men, sometimes ones who were my age.

I would look over their profiles. If I didn’t believe our personalities or values would be a match, I would either ignore their private messages to me, or I’d politely decline by letting them know I didn’t feel we would be a match.

I never insulted these men or said anything rude. I was as polite as I could be and kept the notes very brief.

What would happen next is a lot of guys would write me back very angry. They would complain, whine, or cajole me to “just give me a chance.”

There was one guy in particular who was VERY persistent after I politely turned him down.

Hindsight being what it is now, I should have just ignored all further mail from him and blocked him, but I was still in my “super nice girl” phase, so I kept replying (very nicely) and telling him, “Sorry, but I’m just not interested. I wish you luck”.

The dude would not back off. He still kept writing back, going on and on about how I should “just give him a chance. You won’t know if you like me or not until you meet me. Date me at least once.”

I’m not entirely against that idea. I do get what he’s saying, but sometimes, you can just tell from a person’s profile that a date  (or relationship) wouldn’t work between the two of you, so you don’t want to waste your time or theirs.

Let me tell you, if his incompatible sounding profile didn’t convince me that we weren’t a match before, his refusal to GET LOST and refusal to TAKE MY NO as an answer really hit home that he was all wrong for me, was insecure, and controlling – red flags ahoy.

I can’t remember if I did end up blocking him or he finally left me alone.

The point is, this dude sure seemed entitled. He felt that because he was attracted to me, I should give him the time of day. He felt that I owed him my attention and a date.

Apparently, according to that one lesbian lady’s Twitter page, there are trans-women who feel owed dates with lesbians, because they find lesbians (or some specific lesbians) attractive, but the lesbians they approach only feel attracted to biological women.

That you find an entire type of people attractive (lesbians, or blondes, or eskimos, or Russians, or whomever) does not mean these people have to date you or necessarily find you or your type of people group attractive.

If they don’t want to date you, or they don’t find your type of group attractive, does not necessarily mean they are horrible people.

I find the terrorist group ISIS appalling for so many reasons. They are child rapists, for one. But according to some liberals, I should be willing to date ISIS members, or else, I guess they are arguing, I am “Islamophobic.”

I detest people who have sex with animals, because that is a deviant behavior, but more importantly, it’s a type of animal abuse (and I (Link): detest animal abuse). According to these “dating inclusive” liberals, however, me not wanting to date these perverts means I am a terrible person.

DILs (Dating Inclusive Liberals) want me to be codependent in my romantic life: I’m not allowed to make my own determinations and choices about whom to date, have sex with, or marry. I’m supposed to do as DILs say.

But I’m an adult. I’d like to make my own choices on these sorts of things, thank you, and not have liberals shaking their index fingers in my face in protest about it.

A lot of liberals judge Christians, right wingers, and Republicans for policing people’s bedrooms, because sometimes, those groups will publicly condemn certain types of sexual behavior or relationships as being immoral or gross.

Those conservative groups will tell people who NOT to have sex with (or who not to marry). And that seems to drive liberals nuts.

But some of your liberals turn around and will judge you for who you ARE having sex with, or who you’d PREFER to have sex with (or date), and will order you to have sex with people (or date people) who you do not even find attractive, or else they will slap labels on you, such as “racist” or “transphobic,” or what have you.

How is that attitude any more “progressive” or open minded than what some conservatives are doing? It’s merely the flip side of the same coin.

Using liberal logic, would it not be okay for this guy, (Link): who has sex with horses, to tell those liberals,

“Hey, if you don’t have sex with horses, like I do, or if you do not want to have sex with horses, you are a bigoted anti- Zoophiliac, you judgy prude you. You better go out right now and have sex with a horse to be inclusive, and so as not to offend me.”

How about this teen aged girl who is (Link): having sex with her biological father? Using the same liberal reasoning, she could argue you are not being inclusive if you don’t want to have sex with your family members.

And what of asexuals? Some of them say they experience sexual desire, but they do not find any person – white, black, straight, homosexual, what have you – attractive. Are these “inclusive dating” liberals going to scold these asexuals for just plain not wanting to have sex with any human being at all?

How about the guy I read about in the UK years ago who is only sexually attracted to cars? Yes, (Link): it’s true. Are these liberals going to beat this guy up for not finding any humans sexually attractive, or for preferring cars to humans?

How about hetero celibate women like myself? I am currently choosing to abstain from having sex with men, period, and at that with any man (though I’d only consider having sex with a hetero guy if I were having sex). Are liberals going to actually suggest that by not having sex with any man at all, I am not being inclusive?

Would they suggest I hate all lesbians because I’m hetero and don’t want to have sex with a lesbian?

Are lesbians bigoted for not wanting to have sex with any men at all, never mind “transwomen”?

Why would DILs lecture lesbians about not wanting to be with transwomen but give them a pass for not wanting to be with biological males? Using their logic, are lesbians therefore not being “hetero men haters” just for not being attracted to hetero men?

If DILs are going to be consistent, shouldn’t they be shaming homosexual men for not finding either lesbian or hetero women attractive? Shouldn’t they be demanding that homosexual guys be dating hetero women or asexual women? (Demanding that homosexual men date hetero ladies sounds more like what conservative Christians would do.)

I just did  (Link): a post the other day about a woman who married a guy who she knew had murdered a woman roommate of his years before.

Most women would not want to marry a known killer. Would these DILs chide such women for not being “inclusive” for not wanting to date a killer?

That same lady’s husband later raped two women. So she divorced him. Would DILs criticize her for not wanting to stay married to a guy who rapes women? Would they criticize her over not wanting to stay married to a rapist?

Then you have people who will not date certain types of people due to their religious convictions.

For example, many Christians are taught not to date outside the faith – only marry another Christian. Some very strict branches of Judaism teach it’s wrong for Jews to marry non-Jews.

Some Muslims think that Muslims should only date or marry other Muslims.

Not that I myself really support the Christian concept of “be equally yoked” vis a vis marriage these days (I feel it is a stumbling block for single Christian women who want to marry), but I sort of get where they are coming from on that view. I try to persuade here on my blog how stupid I feel the equally yoked teaching is, but I get that some Christians may genuinely feel that the Bible teaches it, so they must live it out.

Do Dating Inclusive Liberals honestly expect all these religious groups to give up their religious convictions on their say-so (but see (Link): this story)?

I’m currently not dating at all. I don’t know when I will ever be ready to date.  In the meantime, some of my preferences for dating would be guys (who are close to my age, non-abusive, have a steady job, white, brunette, and hetero).

Some of these wacko “dating inclusive” liberals would probably chide me merely for having an opinion about who I’d prefer to date, even though, again, I’m not even actually dating right now.

If you are a Chinese- speaking Russian person with green skin, and you found out that a woman on a dating site didn’t want to date you because she’s not into green skinned people or Chinese-speakers, why the hell would you want her to date you against her will or preferences?

I’m a white, American lady (I do have some non-white ancestry in my family tree, though most would think of me as white, and I read as white). If I contacted a white, American guy on a dating site who prefers, say, Canadian women, and he responded as such, I would just move on. I don’t think I would take it as a personal insult that he’s only looking to date Canadian women.

Or, maybe the guy I meet on a dating site wants a girlfriend who, I don’t know, whose favorite exercise is swimming, while my favorite form of exercise is jogging. That being the case, I wouldn’t take it too personally that he’s turning me down over that.

Though I will say I do find some favored criteria by men unnecessarily limiting for both them and for women: many white American men of all ages chase after girls who are between the ages of 18 and 29.

Meanwhile, you have plenty of wonderful, eligible women ages 30 and higher who would make fine mates for those men, but these jokers won’t even consider dating them. As a result, a lot of these men are unable to get a partner and so stay single against their wills (see this link for more on that).

Again, I am not opposed outright to people having preferences in dating, but some people seem to carry their preferences way too far, or have way too many items on their mate check lists, which ends up limiting them.

I think there’s a sweet spot in the middle somewhere, where you have some prefs, but not a ridiculous amount, and you may be willing to compromise on one or two, if need be.

Anyway, I don’t think I’d want to date a guy who is all,

“Hey, Christian Pundit, I don’t find women like you attractive. You have some freckles, your favorite color is plaid, and you like watching This Old House on PBS.

So I don’t really like you or even find you – your looks or hobbies – attractive, but liberals tell me that I “SHOULD” date you, so here I am!

I’m only dating you to be inclusive and prove that I am not a hater of “This Old House” fans, or people who love plaid who have freckles.”

I would hope to date a guy who is dating me because he sincerely likes me and most of my traits, hobbies, and personality. I don’t want some dude dating me out of a sense of obligation and guilt.

Why would anyone want to date or have sex with someone out of a sense of duty or obligation? But it looks like that is what some liberals are suggesting. I take a pass on that.

———————

Related Posts:

(Link):  Transgender SJW Liberal Person: Biological, Lesbian Women Should Want to Date People Who Have Penises

(Link):   Liberals Disagreeing on Personal Preference as Dating Criteria

(Link):  How Sorry Do We Feel for the Lonesome Single Bachelors of New York? by T. Moore (never married men in their 40s talk about being tired of being single)

(Link):  Christians should marry Muslims to tackle Islamophobia, says peer

(Link):  Marriage, Parenthood, Judgment by Christians and Non Christians – You Can’t Win No Matter What Choice You Make

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s