A Song for All the Male ‘Ones’ (the Fat, Balding, Sexist, and/or Ugly Guys) Who Rate Women on Scales of One To Ten

A Song for All the Male ‘Ones’ (the Fat, Balding, Sexist, and/or Ugly Guys) Who Rate Women on Scales of One To Ten

I present to you the song “Numbers,” recorded by Bobby Bare some time in the 1970s or 1980s.

For all the male idiots out there who think they can and should rate what women look like on scales of 1 to 10.

This song is Doubly applicable to males who are fat, balding, and/or look like they fell out of the Ugly Tree and hit every branch on the way down ~AND~ who think they deserve to date or marry women who look like movie stars or models.

This is so for you, chump.

(Link): Song Lyrics – via AZ Lyrics

(Link): Song Lyrics – via Metro Lyrics

(Link): Song on You Tube

The video / song embedded here:


Related Posts:

(Link):   Dudes, Stop Putting Women in the Girlfriendzone

(Link):  Pickup Artists’ Rape Survivor: ‘I Had to Do My Part to Break the Cycle’

(Link): Why Nice Guys Don’t Get Picked by Women (podcast)

(Link):  Romantic Comedies: When Stalking Has a Happy Ending (from The Atlantic) / Men Who Mistake Platonic Friendliness For Flirting – So Annoying 

(Link):  Love-Sick Teenager Who Won’t Take No For an Answer is Finally Shut Down by his Ex-Girlfriend’s FATHER in an Epic Text Exchange – Men of All Ages Need To Learn to Handle Rejection and to Respect Other People’s Boundaries in Dating

(Link): Nice Guys: Scourge of the Single Woman

(Link):  Nice Guys Aren’t So Nice After All: Men in the “Friend Zone” Often Have A Hidden Agenda, Say Psychologists (Daily Mail article)

(Link):  The Worst Things a Man Can Say in His Online Dating Profile by S. Farris

(Link): ‘It’s Not Me, It’s You’: A Loser’s Guide to Dealing with Rejection by The Guyliner

(Link): Nice Guys – the bitter single men who complain women don’t like nice men

(Link): Follow up: BITTER GUY Replies to ‘It’s Okay To Call A Guy Creepy (article) / Little Sympathy for Ugly Single Guys’

(Link): Women Do Care About Male Looks but Don’t Go For Penis Photos

(Link):  Creepy, wrong, immature and pathetic: older men chasing after much younger women

(Link): Men Become ‘Invisible’ And Lose Sex Appeal At 39 – Article from Daily Caller

(Link):   Why Don’t Some Men Realize A Relationship Is Over Until It’s Too Late? by N. Reilly

(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)

Death, Grief, Marriage, Single Again, Soul Sleep, Christianity, Obnoxious Male Fixation on Female Looks

Death, Grief, Marriage, Single Again, Soul Sleep, Christianity, Obnoxious Male Fixation on Female Looks

I have several topics I’d like to address here. I’m going to discuss death, grief, dating, how men are too fixated on women’s looks, etc, and so on, all in the same post.

I learned from watching the Christian program “It is Written” today (Feb 2017) that the wife of Christian TV host Mike Tucker, Gayle, died. I’m not sure when the episode was first filmed or first aired.

You can read a transcript of that episode, “From Grief To Hope” (Link, off site): here.

You might be able to watch that very episode or one like it here: (Link, off site): Coping with Grief.

I see from an online obit that Gayle Tucker passed away in April 2016.

I am sorry for his loss.

I lost my mother, and it hurt a lot.

(Link, off site):  Gayle Tucker, Beloved Marriage Counselor on Faith For Today TV, Dead at 60

April 2016 –  The prominent Adventist television personality dies after a brief struggle with pancreatic cancer.

(Link, off site):   Beloved Christian TV Host, Couples’ Counselor Dead at 60

I learned a few years ago that the hosts and backers of “It Is Written” are SDAs (Seventh Day Adventists).

I also learned from a glance over google search results that Mike Tucker is a Seventh Day Adventist.

Part of SDA theology is something called “Soul Sleep,” a view that I totally disagree with and find discouraging and cruel.

Continue reading “Death, Grief, Marriage, Single Again, Soul Sleep, Christianity, Obnoxious Male Fixation on Female Looks”

The Ugly, Unfair Truth About Looking Beautiful by W. Leith

The Ugly, Unfair Truth About Looking Beautiful By William Leith

(Link): The Ugly, Unfair Truth About Looking Beautiful

Why, after decades of feminism, do we seem to demand that women in the public eye be extraordinarily beautiful but their male counterparts can get away with being ordinary?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The art critic John Berger famously said that, in our culture, “men act and women appear”. He didn’t mean that women didn’t actually do anything, or that men never looked pretty. His point was that this was how men and women were depicted.

Men were supposed to be effective, and women were supposed to be attractive. He was right. And it was a travesty. But that was in 1972; it was a long time ago.

Or was it? Four decades of feminism later I am reading the comedian Angela Barnes’ blog. “I am ugly, and I am proud,” she writes. She goes on to say: “The fact is I don’t see people in magazines who look like me. I don’t see people like me playing the romantic lead or having a romantic life.”

At the top of the blog is a picture of Barnes. And the thing is, she isn’t ugly. Neither is she beautiful. She’s normal looking. She’s somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, just like lots of women you see every day in real life.

It made me think of this year’s Wimbledon ladies’ final between Sabine Lisicki and Marion Bartoli. When Bartoli won, the BBC commentator John Inverdale infamously said, “Do you think Bartoli’s dad told her when she was little, ‘You’re never going to be a looker, you’re never going to be a Sharapova, so you have to be scrappy and fight’?”

Continue reading “The Ugly, Unfair Truth About Looking Beautiful by W. Leith”

Ask Amy: Wife Says She Is Turned Off By Husband’s Fat Body and Muffin Top

Ask Amy: Wife Says She Is Turned Off By Husband’s Fat Body and Muffin Top

I am publishing this to disprove one or two common stereotypes among conservative Christians: that women are not interested in sex, and women are not “visually oriented.”

Here we have an example of a woman who is sexually turned off by the sight of her husband’s obese body and muffin top. Women do in fact pay attention to what men look like and DO CARE about what men look like, though I’d have to say women are a lot less strict and picky about the looks.

Women might be willing to date a “so-so” looking man, so long as he compensates in other areas, like, he treats her really well, or he has a great sense of humor.

But women do notice and care about what men look like, and women can and do get turned off by flabby male bodies, receding hairlines, and so on.

Letter to Ask Amy advice columnist (Sept 2016):

Dear Amy:

How do I tell the man in my life that his huge muffin top is a turn off for me? He is more than plump, Amy, he is obese.

He blames his diabetes on the fact that he cannot satisfy me sexually, but I maintain that it is his obesity that is the reason he has diabetes.

I do not want to insult him or cause him any embarrassment, but I need to get across to him that he has to lose at least 30 to 40 pounds. Even his daughter gives him grief about his weight.

Please tell me how to talk to him without hurting his feelings.

— Diabetes

The Worst Things a Man Can Say in His Online Dating Profile by S. Farris

The Worst Things a Man Can Say in His Online Dating Profile by S. Farris

I would also add to the list on the page I am linking to:

Hetero Men who are seeking women on dating sites and apps: do not send women unsolicited penis photos; do not have anything mentioning sex on your profile, and do not mention (or joke about) sex in any of your “must have” lists on dating sites or any part of your profile.

I don’t care if you are totally into sex and think sex is mucho importante in a relationship, any mention of sex (even if you think it’s funny to put vulgar jokes on your profile) is a turn-off (and / or creepy) to most women.

You wait until you have been dating a person for awhile to bring sex up, and even then, you should be TASTEFUL about it, not crass or perverted or weird.

(Link): The Worst Things a Man Can Say in His Online Dating Profile

Excerpts:

  • They show up for dates looking nothing like their pictures. They tell long, rambling stories about their “psycho exes” or spend the entirety of the evening talking about their material possessions.
  • Men who date online never fail to surprise the women they meet, but they seem to be blissfully ignorant of the fact that they’re scaring people off.
  • With men now (Link): drastically outnumbering women on many dating apps, can guys afford to offend the few female users they might attract?
  •  

    Working with April Masini, a New York City-based relationship expert and psychotherapist, we analyzed responses from women who are currently active on the online dating scene.

  • Masini regularly offers dating advice to people of both genders through her website (Link): AskApril.com. She reviewed the lines women hate to see most on online dating profiles and gave her advice on how men can better phrase them.
  • 1. “No drama.”
  • By the time people join online dating sites, they’ve often had a wealth of experiences that include breakups, job transitions, and possibly even parenthood.

Continue reading “The Worst Things a Man Can Say in His Online Dating Profile by S. Farris”

Weird, Sexist PreOccupation with Female Physical Appearance, Including Christian Males – vis a vis Preacher Doug Wilson

Weird, Sexist PreOccupation with Female Physical Appearance, Including Christian Males – vis a vis  Preacher Doug Wilson

I have blogged on this subject before, or something very similar to it, the weird and worn preoccupation with Christian men with women’s looks and sexuality. Of course, Non Christian men can be just as bad about this and sometimes are.

One of the reasons I am writing this blog post is due to this recent post at Christianity Today:

-But more on that specific post farther below.

There was recently a story in the media about two or three weeks ago about a woman on a site, Linked In, which is a site for professionals to network. This woman received a response from a much-older man on that site who told her how attractive she was in her Linked In site photo.

When this woman wrote him back and told him how sexist and inappropriate his message was, and this story somehow made its way into the public eye, this woman started getting screamed at and criticized by other parties online.

Her story resulted in editorials such as this:

(Link): LinkedIn Is Not a Dating Site (from August or Sept 2015)

  • The case against your dad’s favorite social-media platform being used to “connect” with younger women

The reason I have a difficult time taking articles like the following seriously…

Is precisely because of stuff like this is still taking place:

(Link): LinkedIn Is Not a Dating Site

  • The case against your dad’s favorite social-media platform being used to “connect” with younger women

If we were REALLY living in a society where men were terrified of being accused of sexual harassment by women (especially in the workplace), would we still find men using professional work sites such as Linked In to tell women they don’t even know how gosh-durn sexy – purty they are? No, I think not.

Men are still acting in a sexist and inappropriate fashion towards women, even on professional job-based web sites. Ergo, men cannot be all that afraid of being smacked with sexual harassment labels or lawsuits as the other article is claiming.

That article once more:

Excerpt from that page:

  • Tellingly, Elsesse [female author] adds that companies themselves are contributing to this mess, as they are now so terrified of legal action they send staff on sexual harassment training courses, and are duty-bound to follow up on any allegation, however minor.Ludicrously, Elsesser cites examples of men who have been dragged in by their HR departments for simply opening a door for a female colleague or complimenting her on a new suit. “Stories like these spread around workplaces, instilling a fear that innocent remarks will be misinterpreted,” she says.

Why would a male co-worker find it necessary to tell a female co-worker that her suit is snazzy? Why not instead tell her what a killer job she did on Tuesday’s staff meeting presentation?

You know, praise the woman’s brains, skills, accomplishments or job performance – instead of her appearance?

I am not a left winger, nor am I a secular feminist. I am right wing.

Any time a woman complains about getting a comment about her physical appearance from a man, even if it is a positive comment, my fellow right wingers will howl in protest. They cannot fathom how or why any woman would find getting compliments on her looks to be derogatory, demeaning, unwanted, or annoying.

You are thought to be overly sensitive, or a woman’s studies major who never shaves her arm pits, or a bra-burning, man hating harpy, if you object to a man telling you in any way, shape or form, that you are pretty or sexy.

My fellow right wingers chalk up any female dissent on receiving compliments on looks from a man as being from a left wing, frothing at the mouth, man-hating feminist.

Reminder: I am a right winger who disagrees with secular left wing feminists over 90% (or more) of the time on 90-95% of topics, but on this one, they are totally correct: as a socially conservative, right wing woman, I find it insulting when men call attention to my looks – even in a personal capacity, let alone a professional one.

I don’t like guys on the internet telling me I am hot, sexy, or pretty (which they have done on sites where I have used photos of myself and my real name, and this is not even on dating sites), nor do I enjoy men I don’t know in stores or streets cat-calling me or making comments about my appearance.

Hell, I grew to resent my ex fiance’s continual ‘You are so beautiful’ comment to be tiresome. I asked him several times to stop commenting on my looks, and that if he wanted to praise me, to do so based on some other quality, like my achievements at my job, my sense of humor – anything but my looks.

But the moron would never do it. It made me feel as though he only valued me for my looks, not my personality or anything else I brought to the table (well, he did love my bank account).

In my particular case, I was an ugly duckling as a kid -by some people’s standards- when I was a pre-teen. I was picked on.

I eventually slimmed down, got contact lenses, started wearing mascara, and boom, the male gender suddenly changed their minds about me. I really don’t like being judged or valued primarily or solely upon my physical appearance, but this has happened repeatedly from my teen years into my adult years.

Men don’t get this, they do not comprehend it. They don’t seem to care to know what it feels like to be accepted or rejected based on their looks alone (or primarily), yet this happens to women from the time we are girls and only grows worse as we get to our pre-teen and teen years and older.

It’s very frustrating and dehumanizing to be evaluated only on your physical appearance. Not to have people notice your intellect, your wit, your talents, your skills, to be appreciated for YOU, for who you are, not for what you look like.

One of the things I find annoying about the usual right wing, anti-feminist come-back to women who object to receiving comments from men about their looks is that such women should chill out and learn to appreciate a compliment.

One of the objections I have to that position: it assumes I need or want male validation and at that, for my appearance, and in a job setting.

However, I do not need or want a man’s validation about my physical appearance, especially not in a work-related context.

Continue reading “Weird, Sexist PreOccupation with Female Physical Appearance, Including Christian Males – vis a vis Preacher Doug Wilson”

“I’m Not Attracted to My Husband Anymore” – Christian advice column. I guess Christian married sex isn’t all it’s said to be by Christians

“I’m Not Attracted to My Husband Anymore” – Christian advice column. I guess Christian married sex isn’t all it’s said to be by Christians 

Christians often promise in their sexual purity literature, or sermons or speeches for teen and adult singles, that if singles save their virginity until marriage, that married sex will be great. It will be spectacular. It is implied also that married sex will be regular.

But then, you will occasionally see articles or editorials, like the one I’m posting here, to a page on Christianity Today by Dr. Slattery, where a Christian will belie this Christian propaganda by discussing sexual problems (or other types of problems) that occur in Christian marriages.

(Link):  “I’m Not Attracted to My Husband Anymore” by Dr. Juli Slattery

Excerpt:

  • But women also ask about seemingly less perilous obstacles to intimacy, and this is one of them. How can you be sexually intimate with a man you are no longer attracted to? Is it possible to have a great sex life when there is no chemistry?

Now there is something that is never (that I can recall) seeing in all my years of reading Christian literature about sexual purity, or listening to any sermons that mention the topic.

It’s always just assumed that if you stay a virgin until marriage, you will have no problems what-so-ever in the sex department.

But lo and behold if some Christian women do in fact look at their husband and find his balding head, beer gut, or bad hygiene, or whatever, total sexual turn-offs.

Yet another reason I find this admission interesting – that the doctor who wrote this advice column for a Christian publication is admitting that Christian women confide in her that they are no longer sexually and physically attracted to their husbands – is that much of conservative Christian teaching and biases about women, sex, dating, marriage, and all the rest, frequently assume that women (at least married ones) have no interest in sex, and that neither single nor married women care about what men look like.

Continue reading ““I’m Not Attracted to My Husband Anymore” – Christian advice column. I guess Christian married sex isn’t all it’s said to be by Christians”

What Two Religions Tell Us About the Modern Dating Crisis (from TIME) (ie, Why Are Conservative Religious Women Not Marrying Even Though They Want to Be Married. Hint: It’s a Demographics Issue)

What Two Religions Tell Us About the Modern Dating Crisis (from TIME)

This article (see link to it much farther below) primarily focuses on Jews and Mormons, but it is still very interesting, and I think has things to say about other religious types.

I have done previous posts about the shortage of single adult men among Mormons (Link): here.

There is an interactive map on the page (the TIME article linked to below), where, if you run your mouse over it, right above it, it will tell you the ratio of men to women in your city.

One thing I think that is contributing to why Baptist, evangelical, and other Christian women are staying single so long – among the ones who want to marry – is the Christian belief in “equally yoked,” where Christians pressure Christian women to marry only Christian men.

I’ve already chucked that teaching aside a few years ago, but am not ready to date just yet. Whenever I do start dating again, this time, I am fully open and prepare to date Non-Christian men.

There really are no Christian men to date, and many of the ones who are self professing believers are creeps – serial rapists, killers, etc. (see (Link): this list on my blog for examples). If a Christian woman wants to marry these days, she will really have no choice BUT to marry an atheist or some other sort of Non-Christian.

(Link):  Sorry, ladies, there really is a man shortage (New York Post)

(Link): What Two Religions Tell Us About the Modern Dating Crisis (from TIME) by J. Birger

  • Believe it or not, the rise in Mormon breast implants and $100,000 Jewish dowries can explain why you’re alone on Friday night
  • Values.
  • That’s the one thing that always came up when I’d discuss theories on declining marriage rates or the rise of the hookup culture with my friends or family.
  • “Couldn’t it just be that times have changed?” people would ask.
  • Times have changed, and that is a good thing—especially the fading-away of cruel taboos that once stigmatized women who engaged in premarital sex or bore children out of wedlock.
  • Thing is, times change for a reason. The values question assumes that sexual mores loosen naturally from conservative to liberal. In reality, these values have ebbed and flowed throughout history, often in conjunction with prevailing sex ratios.
  • Today, mainstream dating guides tell the everything-going-for-her career woman it’s her fault she’s still single—she just needs to play hard to get or follow a few simple rules to snag Mr. Right. But the problem is a demographic one.
  • Multiple studies show that college-educated Americans are increasingly reluctant to marry those lacking a college degree. This bias is having a devastating impact on the dating market for college-educated women. Why?
  • According to 2012 population estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, there are 5.5 million college-educated women in the U.S. between the ages of 22 and 29 versus 4.1 million such men. That’s four women for every three men. Among college grads age 30 to 39, there are 7.4 million women versus 6.0 million men—five women for every four men.
  • It’s not that He’s Just Not That Into You—it’s that There Just Aren’t Enough of Him.
  • Lopsided gender ratios don’t just make it statistically harder for college-educated women to find a match. They change behavior too. According to sociologists, economists and psychologists who have studied sex ratios throughout history, the culture is less likely to emphasize courtship and monogamy when women are in oversupply. Heterosexual men are more likely to play the field, and heterosexual women must compete for men’s attention.
  • Of course, tales of scarce men and sexual permissiveness in ancient Sparta won’t convince everyone, so I began to explore the demographics of modern religion. I wanted to show that god-fearing folks steeped in old-fashioned values are just as susceptible to the effects of shifting sex ratios as cosmopolitan, hookup-happy 20-somethings who frequent Upper East Side wine bars.
  • Eventually I hit pay dirt.

Continue reading “What Two Religions Tell Us About the Modern Dating Crisis (from TIME) (ie, Why Are Conservative Religious Women Not Marrying Even Though They Want to Be Married. Hint: It’s a Demographics Issue)”

Groom ‘Sues New Wife For Fraud’ After Seeing Her Without Make Up For First Time

Groom ‘Sues New Wife For Fraud’ After Seeing Her Without Make Up For First Time

Idiot.

(Link): Groom ‘Sues New Wife For Fraud’ After Seeing Her Without Make Up For First Time

  • A man who saw his new wife for the first time without make up is reportedly SUING her for trauma, after being shocked at her appearance.
  • The unnamed couple had just got married in Algeria and after spending the night together, the husband woke up to find his wife bare faced.
  • But rather than admire her natural beauty, instead the man REFUSED to believe the woman was his wife, believing her to be a thief.
  • Finally realising that this was in fact the woman he loved, the man is now allegedly suing her for fraud and “psychological suffering”.
  • A source told Emirates 247: “He said he was deceived by her as she used to fill up her face with make up before their marriage.
  • “He said she looked very beautiful and attractive before marriage, but when he woke up in the morning and found that she had washed the make-up off her face, he was frightened as he thought she was a thief.”
  • The price of the husband’s “suffering” is £13,000.

Beauty, Marriage, Motherhood and Ministry – from New Life Blog

Beauty, Marriage, Motherhood and Ministry

I have done many blog posts about topics mentioned in this other blog post from New Life Blog, which I have linked to farther below.

A lot of conservative Christians sound no different than the secular culture they criticize in terms of the subjects of sex, a woman’s physical appearance, marriage, and so on.

For example, conservative Christians will tell single women who desire marriage that they shouldn’t be too wrapped up in their looks, that any man worth his salt will value you based on your character and brains, remember that Jesus loves you for who you are, not what you look like, so don’t burn yourself out on dieting…

Yet, these same Christians will turn around a moment later and tell Christian single women something like, “But remember, God created men to be visually oriented, so you MUST stay thin, pretty, and attractive, and wear make-up all the time, if you hope to attract and keep a man, and here are some dieting tips for you.”

Yes, Christians often speak out of both sides of their mouths on this topic.

Another annoying tendency I have seen from male Christian speakers, authors, and pastors is to refer to a biblical woman character’s physical appearance, even if it’s a tangent to the text at hand.

Male Christians will sometimes pause in the middle of a sermon or discussion on Adam and Eve, for example, to go on and on about how surely, since Eve was the only woman created directly by God, she must have been a sexy, babe-a-licious fox, yum yum.

Seriously, one Christian guy – a famous author who has his own weekly TV show – I’ve seen who brings this topic up about every time he discusses Adam and Eve practically starts to salivate when thinking about how hot and sexy Eve must have been.

I suspect this guy must have a porn addiction problem, or something of that nature; his extreme fixation on Eve’s appearance makes him seem creepy, perverted, and sexist.

I notice these male idiots never mention that Adam must have been a smoking hot, sexy, hunk of man. And believe you me, most women, even Christian ones, are also “visually oriented” and prefer a hot, good looking, buff man, to an ugly, scrawny, obese, or bald one.

At any rate, I present to you a link  to another blog page which discusses some of these topics and other ones:

(Link): Beauty, Marriage, Motherhood and Ministry from New Life Blog

This blog starts out by describing how women are frequently depicted in the Old Testament: often, women’s physical beauty or virginity is mentioned, and women are usually identified in relation to a man, such as their father, brother, or husband.

Here are excerpts:

  • Women in the New Testament
  • So, how many New Testament (NT) women are described as being beautiful? None. Not one.
  •   Moreover, Paul and Peter dissuaded women from concentrating on their appearance; instead they encouraged women to focus on their character and good works. Admittedly these instructions were given mainly to wealthy married women, and not to potential brides.
  • [cut pertinent Bible verses the blog author cites]
  • Women in the New Testament are mentioned primarily in reference to their Christian faith and ministry, and not in terms of their beauty or marriageability.  We simply do not know whether any NT woman was particularly good looking, or not.
  • Also, many NT women are not mentioned in connection with a male relative. This is unlike OT women who were (Link):  typically identified as either a wife, daughter, mother or sister of a certain man.
  • We don’t even know the marital status of several NT women.

Continue reading “Beauty, Marriage, Motherhood and Ministry – from New Life Blog”

Man attempts to commit suicide by jumping into a lake because he was being forced to marry an ugly bride

Man attempts to commit suicide by jumping into a lake because he was being forced to marry an ugly bride

(Link): Man attempts to commit suicide by jumping into a lake because he was being forced to marry an ugly bride

  • Groom was due to get married to an ugly bride arranged by his parents
  • Pressured by his parents, the groom thought his only escape was suicide
  • Tried to drown himself in a nearby lake but was spotted by passers-by
  • Police officer dived into the water to save him and the unhappy would-be groom is now expected to make a full recovery

———————————-

Related Posts:

(Link):  Penis Amputated After Man, 66, Overdoses On Viagra ‘To Impress New Girlfriend’

(Link):  Thirty Year Old Woman Kills Herself Due to Being Single and Childless – Churches contribute to this by either Ignoring adult singles or shaming them for being single and childless

A Critique of the post “Is It Sexist That Women Twirl?” by Matt Reagan at Desiring God Site

A Critique of the post “Is It Sexist That Women Twirl?” by Matt Reagan 

Someone on my Twitter feed linked to this post by Matt Regan at the Desiring God site a few weeks ago. Apparently, the original title was “Is It Sexist That Women Twirl,” and was later changed to, “Do Little Girls Outgrow the Twirl?”

Original post,

(Link): Is It Sexist that Women Twirl (via Way Back Machine / Internet Archive, January 23, 2015)

The URL to that:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150123215444/http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/is-it-sexist-that-women-twirl

Newer(?) post,

(Link): Do Little Girls Outgrow the Twirl? by Matt Reagan, January 23, 2015

A woman, Eugenie Bouchard, won an international tennis match. A journalist asked her after her win to twirl for him and/or for the audience.

Several media outlets characterized this as being sexist.

Here is some of what MR, Reagan, has to say about the incident; I will quote him, then offer my observations below each quote:

  • Therein lies the problem. When Roger Federer was a little boy, he didn’t run into the living room, call for his parents’ attention, and twirl his outfit in front of them (he wasn’t wearing something twirlable to begin with).
  • But Serena did. Eugenie did. They were little girls, who were made to display the beauty they were given and to have that beauty honored. My daughters are perpetual twirlers, even to the extent that they are searching out the most twirlable skirts and dresses.

My response:

First of all, if a woman or girl of her own accord chooses to “twirl” around in a dress for her daddy in the privacy of their home, that is HER choice.

For a grown man, a so-called professional, to ask a grown woman to “twirl” around in her tennis outfit before a stadium of people after she wins a match, is not treating that woman as another professional. It is not the man’s place to ask a woman in public to “twirl.”

Continue reading “A Critique of the post “Is It Sexist That Women Twirl?” by Matt Reagan at Desiring God Site”

Another Plus-Sized Fumble – To be honest, Sports Illustrated should call itself a men’s magazine with a yearly porn issue.

Another Plus-Sized Fumble –  To be honest, Sports Illustrated should call itself a men’s magazine with a yearly porn issue.

(Link): Another Plus-Sized Fumble –  To be honest, Sports Illustrated should call itself a men’s magazine with a yearly porn issue. by S. Milligan

  • Feb 6, 2015
  • It was a nice few days for girls and women who are interested in sports, both as spectators and competitors. The women who watched the Super Bowl (that would be (Link): 46 percent of the viewership, incidentally) were treated with a bit more respect and regard, when it came to the ballyhooed TV commercials. Yes, the ads are still about manly men, daddy men, men with cars and beer and games.
  • But there was no Swedish Bikini Team or other overtly insulting ad. Instead, we were treated to an excellent ad discussing what it means to (Link): “throw like a girl,” or “run like a girl.” The girls and women in the ad threw and ran like athletes, as they should.
  • Tragically, Sports Illustrated still doesn’t get it. Every year, the alleged sports magazine panders to the base instincts of its base, publishing a “Swimsuit Issue.” The issue displays women in skimpy suits (or half out of them) that no woman would wear to actually swim, and underscores the magazine’s apparent contention that women’s role in sports is to pose seductively for men.
  • But while the advertisers who buy time during the Super Bowl have started to grow up a bit, Sports Illustrated is stubbornly going backwards. Its cover model is pulling down her bikini bottoms to the point where the photo is dangerously close to being sold behind a brown paper wrapper. (And the photo is especially excruciating to see for women, who can imagine the waxing session that went on before the shoot).

Continue reading “Another Plus-Sized Fumble – To be honest, Sports Illustrated should call itself a men’s magazine with a yearly porn issue.”

Update on Born Again Virgin Reality Star TV Guy – and Christians and Their Smokin’ Hot Wives

Update on Born Again Virgin Reality Star TV Guy – and Christians and Their Smokin’ Hot Wives

I’m pretty sure this is the same guy I blogged about here:

For what it’s worth, I am opposed to anyone using phrases such as “Born Again Virgin,” “Spiritual Virgin,” etc. You can click that link above to see why.

If we’re going by penis in the vagina standards to define sex, either one is a virgin or is not a virgin; there is no such thing as a “born again virgin” or “spiritual virgin.”

This comes from SCCL’s Facebook page:

(Link): Sean Loweksu Status – where he refers to his wife as being “smokin’ hot”

Comment by Ariella Tuttle on that thread,

  • He was all about that purity stuff on the show…while he was tonguing like 15 different girls. I think 2 at the same time?

That thread attracted the attention of a few male sexist assh-les who think it’s okay for men to refer to their partners as “smokin’ hot.”

In his facebook status (which is pictured in the SCCL thread), Loweksu refers to his wife as “smoking hot.” Christian men often like to refer to their wives as being “smoking hot,” which is sexist.

Men need to get over valuing women purely, primarily, or only based on their looks.

I was engaged to a man who, for years, would go on and on about how “beautiful” I was, even after I told him that while I appreciated the sentiment, but it had none the less worn thin, and I’d prefer him to praise me on my career, and so on. I actually felt de-valued that he kept harping on my looks.

He never took an interest in my intellect, my opinions about politics or whatever else,/ With my ex, my greatest virtue or asset in his view always came down to how sexy I looked in skirts.

Some of the people in the SCCL Facebook thread are making a distinction between a man who does refers to his wife or sweetie as “smokin hot” in private vs one who does so on social media, in public.

My ex mostly complimented me on my Smokin’ Hot looks in private, but it still grated on my last nerve, I still found it insulting, and it was sexist and rude.

It is NOT “nice” or complimentary to a woman to pay attention to her looks or clothing, but so many men think it is. It’s not. Knock it off.

Women want to be noticed for their brains, hobbies, talents, and career, NOT their weight, hair, manner of dress, sexy legs, bust size, whatever.

Some of the only women who do enjoy this sort of compliment are generally insecure ones – the ones who were once ugly ducklings and the acne cleared up one day, they dropped the weight, and suddenly, they find themselves getting male attention.

I was actually in that group myself – used to have frizzy hair, weight problems – but turned into the beautiful swan; however, I detest it when the only thing men focus on is a woman’s looks, or only my looks in particular. It’s probably one of my top ten pet peeves in life.

If you are a man who is a FATHER, and your dear daughter is dating some guy or marries some guy, would it not bother you in the least if the only quality her husband or BF ever praised her over was her looks?

Wouldn’t you want that ass-clown noticing she’s funny, smart, and accomplished, and for him to tell her so?

How about if your parents divorce, your mother remarries, would it not turn your stomach for your stepfather to ONLY notice and care about your mother’s looks, and never notice or care about her brains, talents, etc?

That’s how women feel when men go on and on judging us for our looks, rating us on scales of one to ten, but don’t bother to take an interest in us as human beings.

Edit. although one idiot posting to the SCCL thread claims to be a father actually wrote,

  • post by Buzz Suplita
  • I have three daughters, no sons. I hope each of their future husbands “disrespects” them and all women in just this way.

And what if your DAUGHTERS do not want to be reduced to their looks and body parts, you’d still be fine with men objectifying them? Buzz is one creepy father.

Being objectified for one’s looks is something that happens to the female gender far more often and consistently than it does the male gender. 

Some of the men chiming in on that thread are either trolling or are being deliberately obtuse. Despite the fact they’ve had it explained to them six ways from Sunday why men publicly referring to their wife as “smokin’ hot” is sexist, they keep saying, “I don’t get it,” “how is this wrong,” or “how is this sexist.”

Here is one comment to some of them, by Annie Dotes, that I agree with:

  • Mike- you’re floating freely between talking about the specific dude [“The Bachelor” reality TV star guy] and talking about the cultural phenomenon. Every time someone addresses one of those you counter with the other. I have repeatedly taken great pains to distinguish between the two. (See my comment 3 above yours).
  • What you are doing is called moving the goalposts, it is a logical fallacy. If you’re being disingenuous on purpose, then knock it off. If you’re actually not keeping up then slow down and read through it again.

    This pic and caption [the photo posted by The Bachelor guy referring to his wife as being “Smokin Hot”], regardless of Mr Bachelor’s intentions, reflects a cultural misogyny where women are primarily valued for the sexual feelings they give men, and their status as conquests. He is participating in that cultural misogyny regardless of his intentions.

Anyway, here are links on other blogs about the annoying, sexist habit of men to objectify all women, or their wives in particular, by referring to them as Smokin Hot.

(Link):  I’m Sick of Hearing About Your Smoking Hot Wife

(Link):  Smokin’ Hot Wives and Water to the Soul

(Link):  Pastor, Your Wife Might Be “Smokin’ Hot,” But …

—————

Related posts on this blog:

(Link):  The Annoying, Weird, Sexist Preoccupation by Many Christian Males with Female Looks and Sexuality

Celibacy is Not Just for Homosexuals or Roman Catholic Priests / and a critique of a post at another blog

Celibacy is Not Just for Homosexuals or Roman Catholic Priests / and a critique of a post at another blog

I will start this post out in general terms and then proceed to offer a critique of a post by John Morgan, so excerpts from his post will be much farther below.

It appears to me that the Bible says that sex is reserved for married couples, with marriage being defined by Jesus Christ as being between one man and one woman.

When responding to a question about marriage by religious critics, Jesus referred back to Adam and Eve in the Garden, pointing out that it was God’s original intent for marriage to be comprised of one man, one woman.

However, it appears that many people associate the practice of, or the word, “Celibacy” with only homosexual singles these days, and for hundreds of years, with Roman Catholic priests.

I’ve seen several articles where some Roman Catholics are asking their church to repeal the celibacy requirement from priests.

Here are some examples of the recent discussion of celibacy in regards to homosexuality:

(Link):  Number of celibate gay Christians rises in traditional churches

(Link): Growing movement of gay Christians choosing celibacy

(Link):  Gay Christians choosing celibacy

(Link): Gay, Celibate, Christian?

(Link):  FDA Favors Year Of Celibacy Rule For Gay Male Donors

I follow the conservative blog “Hot Air” on Twitter. Hot Air moderators recently posted a blog page about celibate homosexuals. Here it is,

(Link): Gay Christians choosing celibacy emerge from the shadows – from Hot Air’s blog

I have more to say about this Hot Air article farther below.

At any rate. Since so many homosexuals claim they were born homosexual and cannot change their sexual orientation, I proposed over a year ago, before the “celibacy” topic became popular in various news outlets, that homosexual Christians practice celibacy.

I think it is a workable compromise: if you have homosexual leanings, feel attracted to the same gender, I don’t think that means you have to act upon sexual urges.

I have no idea why this idea would be considered controversial, but according to several news articles I have read, it is in fact considered a controversial idea among Christians, heterosexuals, and homosexuals.

I do not see why, as HETEROsexuals are also commanded by the Bible to remain celibate, unless they are married to an opposite gender person; people are permitted, by God, teaches the Bible, to have sex with their opposite gender partner, but in no other circumstances.

Lifelong celibacy is NOT impossible.

For example, see this post on this blog:

(Link): Typical Erroneous Teaching About Adult Celibacy Rears Its Head Again: To Paraphrase Speaker at Ethics and Public Policy Center: Lifelong Celibacy is “heroic ethical standard that is not expected of heteros, so it should not be expected of homosexuals” (ie, it’s supposedly an impossible feat for any human being to achieve)

Lifelong celibacy can be difficult at times, yes, but not impossible, yet many Christians keep depicting a life without sex as being a Herculean task only a tiny few are capable of, because, they wrongly assume, God sprinkles magic dust on celibate singles to remove sexual desire. This is false.

Celibates still experience sexual urges and desires and attraction, they simply choose not to act upon those feelings or attractions.

When married people are apart, they are expected, by the Bible, to abstain from sex.

Continue reading “Celibacy is Not Just for Homosexuals or Roman Catholic Priests / and a critique of a post at another blog”

Does Sexism Hurt Men Too? If this picture of ‘perfect’ women is being blamed for self-hate and eating disorders… then why isn’t this one?

Does Sexism Hurt Men Too?  If this picture of ‘perfect’ women is being blamed for self-hate and eating disorders… then why isn’t this one?

I have noticed that secular, left wing feminists can be complete hypocrites at times, and I’ve discussed it before (see links at bottom, under “Related Posts”).

I’ve never heard of John Prescott before – he’s mentioned in the following editorial – have no idea who he is, but this editorial does highlight some of the double standards that left wing feminists harbor.

I still believe that society places far more emphasis on women concerning physical appearance than it does males.

Women are not allowed in American (or British) culture to age, gain weight, or get wrinkles.

We women are expected to be perpetually stick thin, sexy at all times, we cannot have wrinkles, we can never age.

Men don’t face as near as much pressure to retain a thin, youthful, and attractive appearance, but they have been getting more pressure in this area in recent years.

And, which in a way, is not entirely a bad thing.

Christian men seem to be coddled by Christian culture to think that so long as they do things like read their Bible daily, claim to love Jesus and attend church once a week, that they can be bald, fat, ugly, be 56 years old, and weigh 678 pounds and still qualify for a sexy, 22 year old, stick thin, chesty woman as a wife or girlfriend.

Which is wrong, as well as delusional thinking.

Many Christian women are visually oriented and would prefer to date good looking men rather than ugly or fat ones, and it doesn’t matter how “godly” the men in question are. Most men don’t hear that message in most Christian material on dating, however.

I’m not saying it’s good that men are starving themselves to death to be pretty, but that some of them are now catching on that it’s not enough to have a great job, attend church, or have money, that doing or having those things does not entitle them to a great, attractive, smart woman, is a message they need to come to terms with.

The page below compares two photos. One photo was from some company campaign, showing women in their underwear, a photo which got a lot of criticism from feminists. The other photo shows a similar advertisement campaign but it contains a built, studly looking young male model in only his underwear.

(Link): If this picture of ‘perfect’ women is being blamed for self-hate and eating disorders… then why isn’t this one?

Excerpts.

  • When John Prescott revealed he suffered from bulimia, he was ridiculed
  • But recently, feminists complained that a Victoria Secret’s ad played on women’s insecurities and sent out damaging messages 
  • There was no similar outcry over David Gandy’s steamy M&S posters 
  • But Peter Lloyd claims ‘muscle men’ are unarguably as damaging to male self-perception as The Perfect Body is to females
  • In a controversial new book, he claims men are the real victims of sexism 

Continue reading “Does Sexism Hurt Men Too? If this picture of ‘perfect’ women is being blamed for self-hate and eating disorders… then why isn’t this one?”

Follow Up Part 2 – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

Follow Up Part 2 – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

Original Post:

Follow Up 1:

More backlash:

Note: as to this link below, at the LA Times, the section on the page entitled “It misleads women into thinking they have time” was actually quite sexist. I have chosen to not paste that part of the page in.

That part was written by a Charlotte Allen who argues that all men will always favor 22 year old women over 42 year old women, mostly because most men want to have babies.

I don’t know what rock that woman writer is living under, but women in their 40s still get their periods every month and conceive ((Link): read this page for starters – that is one but several pages I have on this blog noting that lots and lots more women are getting pregnant, some for the first time, over age 40).

I personally never really cared if I had a baby or not, but I think it’s sexist to say that women over 40 are basically unvaluable (to men) because, in the writer’s opinion, they’re all barren (they are not, by the way. A lot of “oops” pregnancies happen to women over 40, because they go off birth control under the mistaken notion “I can no longer get pregnant, or not easily.”)

(Link): What’s so offensive about Esquire’s praise of 42-year-old women?

Excerpts:

    By ALEXANDRA LE TELLIER

    Women don’t need a writer dressed in feminist clothing to define her worth by his own narrow definitions

    Tom Junod set the social web aflame with his article praising 42-year-old women. Never did one think that Esquire, a men’s magazine that’s stayed above the lad mag fray, could enrage so many people. But that it did, with people accusing Junod of sexism.

    “Let’s face it: There used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman,” Junod begins. Now, he writes, “it may be said that the best thing that forty-two-year-old American men have going for them is forty-two-year-old American women.”

    It might sound like a compliment, but women aren’t buying it.

    … I asked some of our female writers for their thoughts, and here’s what they had to say.

    Where has Junod been?

    … And, men, you now have Esquire’s permission to objectify women in their 40s without being creepy to other men. (But, again, only if the women do Pilates and yoga.) This expands your potential ogling to hundreds, even thousands more women each year.

    Kidding aside, I find the whole premise of the piece to be completely outdated, if it was ever true to begin with. It’s as though Esquire and Junod have been cryogenically frozen for the last 20 to 30 years and woke up to discover this new creature in mass media called the Modern Woman. She’s independent! She’s empowered! She’s still sexy at 40!

    But my biggest complaint is that Junod and Esquire reinforce the sexualization of women in general — the idea that the value of a woman is how much she arouses a man.

    Continue reading “Follow Up Part 2 – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)”

Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)

This is a follow up to my post from yesterday,
(Link): Obnoxious, Condescending, Sexist, Pervy Esquire Editorial by 50-Something Year Old Man: “In Praise of 42 Year Old Women” – Condescendingly Reassures 40 Something Women He’d Sex Them Up

Here are other people’s reactions to the insufferable, obnoxious, ageist, and sexist Junod editorial on Esquire.

(Link): Older women don’t need mansplaining boner prose in praise of their sexiness

    by Jessica Valenti
    theguardian.com,
    Friday 11 July 2014 07.15

    An homage in a men’s magazine to the ‘carnal appeal’ of 42-year old women is no great win for feminism

    Breaking news! Men’s magazines have determined that it is not abnormal for men to ogle and objectify women over the age of 40! Women of the world, feminism has won! Rejoice!

    Or not.

    To kick off its annual women issue, Esquire magazine on Thursday published an essay called “In Praise of 42-Year Old Women”, assuring the normally-depressed old hags that dudes (or at least the writer Tom Junod) still want to bang them. Junod – who has an “interesting” history writing about women – writes that, while “[t]here used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman”, they now have “carnal appeal”.

    — start Junod quote
    A few generations ago, a woman turning forty-two was expected to voluntarily accept the shackles of biology and convention; now it seems there is no one in our society quite so determined to be free. Conservatives still attack feminism with the absurd notion that it makes its adherents less attractive to men; in truth, it is feminism that has made forty-two-year-old women so desirable.
    — end Junod quote

    Protip to male writers gorging on self-congratulation as they deem grown woman fuckable: leave feminism out of it.

    Junod, careful to qualify that the 42-year-old women worthy of praise are those who “have armored themselves with yoga and Pilates even as they joke about the spectacle”, seems to believe that he has done women a great kindness with this piece. But when he writes that 42-year-old women are “superior” to men and that “the best thing that that forty-two-year-old American men have going for them is forty-two-year-old American women”, he does so with the same benevolence of a lazy husband praising his wife’s laundry skills. (Or financial skills, in his case.)

    It’s easy for men to call women “superior” in a society that privileges men at nearly every turn: they’re not the ones being grossly objectified under the guise of a compliment.

    Certainly, women over 40 deserve more reverence and respect than they typically get – and I’d love to see women of all ages receive that … outside of women’s magazines and day-time talk shows. We live in a culture, often driven by the media and Hollywood, that paints women over 25 as desperate and pathetic: we’re considered past our prime, never to be “nubile” (a word worth banning from our collective consciousness if there ever was one) again!

    But the validation that women seek is generally not of the erection-producing variety. It’s very nice and all that writers are catching on that women of all ages can be sexy, but framing that as an amazing new discovery makes it more about men than it is about us (which feels about par for the course).

    For example, in a companion piece on Esquire’s website, writer Stephen Marche urges us all – in a slightly less cringe-inducing way than Junod’s overwrought boner-prose – to retire the word MILF. He writes that “there’s another explanation for the rise of 42, one that’s even more revelatory. Maybe it isn’t fashion at all. Maybe it’s what men wanted all along.”

    Right. But maybe, just maybe, what men want isn’t – and doesn’t always have to be – the damn point.

(Link): BREAKING: Esquire Declares 42-Year-Old Women Now F-ckable by Tracy Moore

    Why, used to be, a woman at the age of 42 could hardly be glanced at, much less taken to bed and ravaged shame-free in broad daylight. No longer. Esquire has sent word across all channels that 42-year-old women have been removed from the Do Not Bang list and are no longer off-limits to respectable men. In other news, FIRE SALE AT CHICO’S.

    Forty-two year-old broads everywhere can now pack up their loose but crisp linen shirts, let their slightly graying hair down, and select their finest modest but sexy cocktail dress and get back out there.

    Behold the clarion call courtesy of author Tom Junod:

    —- start Junod quote
    Let’s face it: There used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman. With half her life still ahead of her, she was deemed to be at the end of something—namely, everything society valued in her, other than her success as a mother. If she remained sexual, she was either predatory or desperate; if she remained beautiful, what gave her beauty force was the fact of its fading. And if she remained alone… well, then God help her.
    — end Junod quote

    We’ve all seen those women — you know, the beautiful aging ones who just seemed so pathetic for existing at all. Also, he is right, I can’t think of more forceful beauty than the fading kind. The not-fading kind is great — don’t get me wrong — but if you think about it, it’s just not quite as potent, all said. However, a hint of beauty once there is just, well, sickening. Really sad, too.

    The only thing more ludicrous than Tom Junod’s feelings about 42-year-olds are the misguided assumptions that lurk beneath them… like a 42-year-old woman clawing at the icy surface above her, desperate to escape the tomb of her old age and fading beauty, trapped in part because she acknowledges that icy cold water could significantly invigorate her appearance.

    Continue reading “Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)”

Obnoxious, Condescending, Sexist, Pervy Esquire Editorial by 50-Something Year Old Man: “In Praise of 42 Year Old Women” – Condescendingly Reassures 40 Something Women He’d Sex Them Up

Obnoxious, Condescending, Sexist Esquire Editorial by 50-Something Year Old Man, Tom Junod: “In Praise of 42 Year Old Women” – Condescendingly Reassures 40 Something Women He’d Sex Them Up
—————
WARNING: This post contains the “F” word in it a lot, mostly by other people who I am quoting. I am not going to sit here and edit out all the “F” words. Proceed at your own risk if naughty words make you blush

Edit. There is a follow up to this post on this blog here:
(Link): Follow Up – Reactions by Other Writers to Sexist, Condescending 50 Something Men Who Think They Are Final Arbiters of If Women Are Attractive Past Age of 40 (Re: Esquire Editorial by Junod)
—————-
I do acknowledge that there is a lot of sexism and ageism in our culture. Women are thought to have “sell by” dates – and I notice this age varies.

(By the way, the same thing has caught up to men now. See for instance: (Link): Men Become ‘Invisible’ And Lose Sex Appeal At 39 – Article from Daily Caller)

This attitude about women and women’s ages varies from person to person, and from decade to decade.

I remember when I was a kid, age 40 was thought to be a little on the “old” side – not by me personally, but by the wider culture, the TV shows, magazines, newspapers, people in their 20s and maybe 30s at the time.

(Starting when I was around age eight, I began reading the newspaper almost daily, even the front section, that had the political and cultural news, and I watched the evening news with my father every night. That’s how I can say with confidence I’m pretty well attuned to how people viewed things back then.)

In the last few years, sexist PUA and MRA guys have said a woman’s expiration date is age 25, while others of them say no, it’s 30, while others might say 35. Of course, all of them overlook the fact that women do not even have an expiration date to start with.

That none of these males can agree with each other on when a woman supposedly loses her hotness testifies to the truth that it’s all bogus.

Even in the sub-heading of this nauseating editorial, it is stated from the out-set,

    In our occasional ranking of the ages, we found that this year’s most alluring is not what you’d expect. It’s not 27 (honored in 1999) or 39 (2008) or 86 (1937 and 1983). No, this year it’s 42. Because it’s not what it used to be.

You might be tempted to think, well, if that is so, if this magazine is honoring 40 something women, wouldn’t you be thrilled that a magazine is writing an editorial saying that 40 something women are no longer considered old, past their prime, or old hags? No, not entirely.

Because the editorial is condescending, and the author, Tom Junod, says insulting things, such as, a woman’s beauty is fading when she is in her 40s (no, it’s not).

This reminds me of an editorial at a Christian site, by a married man, who tried to reassure adult singles that we are fine dandy dan just they way we are.

I appreciate that the Christian author was trying to be helpful or compassionate to older singles, but the condescending attitude was more of a put down (read that page here: (Link): Oh geeze. Another married Christian condescendingly patting single Christians on the head, reassuring them they are dandy as-is, and to remember they have the fictional Gift of Singleness)

It’s the same thing with this editorial. The male author, who is 55 or 56 years old, says he would gladly have sex with a 42 year old woman.

I saw photos of this guy at Gawker, and I find him terribly unattractive. I am in my early 40s, fit, attractive, and I would not give him the time of day. What on earth makes him think I’d want to do him, out of gratitude that he says he finds women of my age still attractive? No, no, no. That is condescending.

As an author at Gawker summarized the Esquire editorial:

(Link): Esquire Writers: We’re Willing to Fuck Early Middle-Aged Ladies, (from Gawker)

The original ed is here:
(Link): IN PRAISE OF 42-YEAR-OLD WOMEN, by Tom Junod (on Esquire’s site)

Yeah, see, I don’t need a dude more than ten years my age reassuring me I’m fine as I am. I already know I’m fine as I am.

Here’s the intro:

    by Tom Junod
    Published in the August 2014 issue

    Let’s face it: There used to be something tragic about even the most beautiful forty-two-year-old woman.

    With half her life still ahead of her, she was deemed to be at the end of something—namely, everything society valued in her, other than her success as a mother.

    If she remained sexual, she was either predatory or desperate; if she remained beautiful, what gave her beauty force was the fact of its fading. And if she remained alone… well, then God help her.

From the Gawker author’s take on Junod’s editorial:

    Esquire magazine (Motto: “The Inactive Ingredients of Erection Pills, in Magazine Form”) has a very important message to all the 42-year-old women out there: Esquire writer at large Tom Junod might like to fuck you.

    That’s right, ladies of a certain age (42). Tom Junod has decided you may still be hot.

    This was not always the case. Once upon a time, 42-year-old women were not really worth wanting to fuck, or if Tom Junod did want to fuck one, it made him sad.

    [snip Juno intro]

    Now, though? Now 42 is awesome. Tom Junod can name several famous women who are 42 who he would be willing to fuck. Right in their 42-year-old vaginas. Cameron Diaz. Sofia Vergara. Leslie Mann. Amy Poehler.

    He would fuck these women, despite their age, and even share a joke with them, because the 42-year-old woman, she is a person, or at least a person-like idea:

    [Gawker author quoting Junod]:
    It is no accident that every woman mentioned here has comic as well as carnal appeal, and entices with the promise of lust with laughs.

But it’s not all easy. Being sexually attractive to Tom Junod at the age of 42 is a real job:

    [Gawker author quoting Junod]:
    Of course, they have to work for their advantage; they have armored themselves with yoga and Pilates even as they joke about the spectacle.

    Still, what has made them figures of fantasy is not that they have redefined the ideals of female strength but rather their own vulnerabilities.

    Go to a party: There is simply no one as unclothed as a forty-two-year-old woman in a summer dress. For all her toughness, and humor, and smarts, you know exactly what she looks like, without the advantage of knowing who she is.

Were you afraid you might go to a summer party, as a 42-year-old woman, and not have a magazine writer mentally appraise what you would look like without your clothing on? Fear not (as long as you’ve been doing yoga and Pilates)—Tom Junod is so thoroughly prepared to undress you with his mind, you’re already naked.

What accounts for society’s and Esquire’s sudden tolerance of women of this age, 42? Tom Junod, according to Wikipedia, was born in the Eisenhower Administration, and is currently either 55 or 56 years old. Nevertheless, Tom Junod is gracious enough to admit he’s capable of wanting to fuck women who are within 13 or 14 years of his own age.

I, myself, by coincidence, am 42 years old right now. But I am male. As such, I would like to follow Tom Junod’s lead and reassure all the 28-year-old women of the world that I do not believe their advanced years should render them sexually unattractive to me.

Or maybe he’s using a percentage, rather than a spread of years. Tom Junod is willing to entertain the thought of intimate relations with women all the way up to 75 percent of his own age.

Tom Junod, age 21, cruises into the high school parking lot to tell the 15-year-olds they’re still OK. (He shakes his head at Sweet Sixteen parties, though.)

Tom Junod, age 30, is ready to consider dating a summer intern in his office, even if she has already finished college. Tom Junod, age 85, tells a 63-year-old woman not to worry, she’s still got a little something going on, in his eyes.

It boils down to feminism, you see:

    [Gawker author quoting Junod]:
    A few generations ago, a woman turning forty-two was expected to voluntarily accept the shackles of biology and convention; now it seems there is no one in our society quite so determined to be free.

    Conservatives still attack feminism with the absurd notion that it makes its adherents less attractive to men; in truth, it is feminism that has made forty-two-year-old women so desirable.

This is what it was all about, ladies.

But Tom Junod is, after all, only one man. You may be asking yourselves: Do other men also want to fuck 42-year-old women? Do they ever!

There’s a double feature playing at the Esquire Drive-In, and the second show is by Stephen Marche, who is not quite even 40 yet. Guess what?

    [Gawker author quoting Marche]:
    Women who are 42 are grown-ups, they are in control of their own lives, or as in control of their own lives as they are going to be anyway, and it is altogether good that American men desire women in this state. Desirability and self-possession should go together.

Marche, though, is not sure this is so nice. He is writing to express the fact that he is uncomfortable about the use of the term “MILF,” when applied to these 42-year-old targets of male desire.

Why? Possibly because it is a porn indexing term, inherently and exclusively used to objectify women? Well, yes, but no. The fact that “MILF” is a popular pornographic search term, to Marche, indicates not that it is a constructed concept, which is shaping men’s sexual expectations, but the opposite—that it reflects some deeper or prior impulse. You can ((( click here ))) to read the rest.

No, I don’t find it flattering or reassuring that a wrinkly looking 55 year old writes an editorial telling women of my age he’d still like to boink me.

The guy who wrote this travesty apparently thinks this is a one way street, where only men are visual and only men care about what a person looks like. Wrong! Women are visual and care about when men look like.

I find that condescending on so many different levels, that for one, he assumes I’d find him handsome or charming enough to want to boink back (and the answer to both is no, I don’t).

I don’t need anyone reassuring me it’s okay to be 40-something. I already know that. Trying to convince me it’s okay is actually insulting in a way.

Here are a few of the reader comments from Gawker that were underneath this article:

by NoLackawannaTom Scocca
Yesterday 8:04pm
I find it sadly comical that men— aging, fat, balding— always think they can attract women half their age. (Actually, they often can—if they’re rich or famous or both.)
I wonder if they ever considered that some hot, beautiful women ten years older than them would drink battery acid before they would fuck them.

by baddoggy
Thursday 2:05pm
This is fucking jaw dropping.

It takes a lot to get a rise out of me but this Tom Junod guy has hit a spot I didn’t know was there. I’m a 40 year old male and this sickens me.

This guy is disgusting.
I couldn’t even finish the article.

The parts I did read made me puke in my mouth a little bit. He’s what? 55 or 56? So who in the hell is he lusting after in real life? What age is the lady he’s dating or married to? Jeez.

by courtneys_keyboard
Thursday 1:58pm
What the shit is this shit.

This is nauseating to men and women. The idea that women have a sell by date is ludicrous, and the idea that men should determine who to sleep with based on chronology is moronic.

The truth is that people will sleep with almost anyone. People (mostly in Florida) will have sex with relatives, with animals, with warm soup.

The attempt to make yourself feel more successful by only copulating with what the Esquire staff considers acceptable is pretty pathetic. Fuck who you want, provided they also want you, and shut up about it.

Continue reading “Obnoxious, Condescending, Sexist, Pervy Esquire Editorial by 50-Something Year Old Man: “In Praise of 42 Year Old Women” – Condescendingly Reassures 40 Something Women He’d Sex Them Up”

Men Become ‘Invisible’ And Lose Sex Appeal At 39 – Article from Daily Caller

Men Become ‘Invisible’ And Lose Sex Appeal At 39 – Article From Daily Caller

(Link): Men Become ‘Invisible’ And Lose Sex Appeal At 39

    At 39, men lose their sex appeal and become “invisible” to women, a new study conducted by Crown Clinic Manchester revealed.

    With 1,000 people polled, 52 percent of participants and 62 percent of women said that men lose their sex appeal when they’re about to turn 40, according to the Daily Mail. The biggest sign of being “invisible” was not being eyed up or approached by women during a night on the town, according to 53 percent of participants.

    At 40, men are looked at more as father figures than sex symbols, according to Express. Other factors for loss of sex appeal at 39 include thinning and graying hair, a double chin and bad teeth.

    Continue reading “Men Become ‘Invisible’ And Lose Sex Appeal At 39 – Article from Daily Caller”