Is It Misogyny?

[2322]

Something that's always bothered me.

I sometimes talk to straight guys about sex and when the subject of what they like arises they'll go on and on about all the hot things they like women to do.

Yet there are also times when these same guys talk about gay sex and they start talking about how disgusting and repulsive it is to even think of sucking a cock or kissing a guy or fingering his ass or fucking a guy. When they talk about these things they are so disdainful that I wonder why they think it is OK for women to do them if these acts are indeed so degrading to do. It's as if many straight men believe that women could not find male genitals something attractive and so only perform sex acts with men because they're so into the guy that they do it only to please him. This reminds me of the Victorian idea that women do not enjoy sex, that they find men handsome only in appearance, and cannot find men sexually arousing.

Part of me finds an answer to this in how men view themselves. Men like to look good for themselves. They like to look at their bodies and think they look good compared to other men. It's like the old saw, "women wear makeup because of other women," not to necessarily be sexually attractive to other men. Men don't like to think that women judge them on their physical attributes. Maybe this is part of the whole mantra many men tell themselves when they think that they're dick is hot no matter how big or small it is and it's how you use it that makes all the difference. If a woman doesn't like how you perform sexually then she must be a lesbian or there's something wrong with her.

As an example, straight men do not like to think, or possibly do not naturally consider, they're on obvious public display like women are. Men in semi and fully formal occasions all wear exactly the same thing so they don't stand out yet all the women look vastly different wearing many different types of elaborate gowns and are, indeed, horrified if a woman wears the exact same gown. It's not appearance of the man that men believe impresses women so much as who or what the man is.

I'm not saying most straight men don't realize that some modicum of good grooming and dressing isn't important in attracting women, but they tend to seem that so long as they make the minimum effort, there shouldn't be a problem.

So when I hear straight men speaking about their own genitals as something they find repulsive to consider in any way other than with a kind of humorous pride, I have to wonder just what they think of women when women perform sexual acts on the male genitals or even kiss a man.

I don't see this kind of thing nearly so much with women. While most straight women don't seem to think of their genitals so much as anything other than another body part, they don't seem to harbor the outright revulsion that men have. It's like both sexes have agreed that genitals of women are, somehow, naturally attractive while men believe male genitals range from silly to grotesque. Men tend to believe that women enjoy cock for how it makes their vaginas feel, not because they crave cock the same way men crave pussy or tits or ass.

I find this attitude, frankly, a kind of misogyny because it leads me to think that men believe women degrade themselves when having sex with men. There's a contradiction in that while men believe any woman would want them, that women performing sexual acts are somehow lowering themselves in the process. They're submitting to doing something no straight man would ever consider doing because the men find it disgusting.

These same men may well see lesbian porn and find it highly arousing. They see women doing things with other women and find it very erotic and they somehow don't think the women are revolting for doing it in the same way they would find two men doing the same things revolting.

What are your thoughts on this? Am I accurate and if so, what does it mean?

 

[whatireallywant]

I don't know if it's misogyny or homophobia or a combination of both.

However, I'm odd in that I am a woman who finds female genitalia repulsive! I know I have it, and I'm ok with that, if it's repulsive looking to me it's because I think ALL pussies are ugly. I'm ok with women who are lesbians though. Doesn't bother me any.

The Victorian idea that women don't enjoy sex lives on in some people who have repressive upbringings though, unfortunately. I heard that a lot when I went to college. I was on a dorm floor with a bunch of women who didn't think women were even supposed to enjoy sex! My upbringing wasn't as repressive and although I did get the "wait until you're married" stuff, I didn't get the "Women aren't supposed to enjoy it" stuff, thankfully! (At least not from my mom, and didn't hear one way or the other from my dad... other relatives did seem to think women aren't supposed to enjoy it...)

 

[Rocky14441]

I see rampant Mysogyny in both straight and gay men. I don't think the aspect about male genitalia has as much to do with Mysogyny as it does to do with homophobia. Mosat guys I know, when you get down to it, are obsessed by thier cocks. our language is full of references to it, many men spend their entire adult lives fighting it, but in the end we really care about how big we are and how other men see us.
Most men are to some degree bisexual. The vast majority of men deny this. I thiink the repulsion they make themselves feel over other cocks is just compensation.
Most of the boyys I used to fool around with are now "straight" and married. Want to piss them off? try talking about the fun they used to have with other boys. When it comes down to it, I think men know on an intuitive level that just spanking one off with their buddies is innocent fun, but god forbid they admit it on a concious level. They would have to instantly condemnn themselves for being...gasp!...homosexual.
One of the reasons I like this site is that so many men are willing to admit that sexuality is rarely an absolute.
As for mysogyny? There are way too many mommy issues out there for most men to even have a chance at relating on equal footing with women.

 

[D_Pubert Stabbingpain]

There seems to be an awful lot to "flesh out" in your question Jason. First, misogyny is hatred of women and misandry is hatred of men. I don't think either apply for someone who is "repulsed" by their own genitals or their natural bodily functions. Some people are not comfortable with their bodies in general. Some think that certain parts of their bodies are more "dirty" than others. But, it seems to me that your post has more to do with internalized homophobia. E.g., a man who is comfortable, even turned on, watching 2 women make love but is repulsed by seeing 2 men. I would think that most men would just say that watching 2 men does nothing for them but to say that it repulses them hints of internal homophobia.

Your other point seems to be about men's acceptance of their own bodies. To many men, their genitalia are merely "tools" used toward achieving a goal.

It has always amazed me that blue collar workers who are use to working in situations where they get covered with oil, dirt, greast, mud, coal, etc., each day of their lives seem to be the most uncomfortable with getting their hands dirty in a bathroom or getting semen on their own bodies. It is like they view it as a sort of necessary "by-product" of pleasure but one which they hate. It seems that they are highly sensitive to the smell and that is really hard to believe for a big burly man. Of course, these same men probably eat some heafty protein-rich meals made from the likes of varioius types of meat, all of which cause a very "bleach-smelling" ejaculate. I think they would rather just not deal with it and deposit it anywhere but on themselves. I don't really think you can categorize this other than they are uncomfortable with the natural functions of their bodies.

I like you simple polls better! :smile:

 

[D_Pubert Stabbingpain]

What's with guys calling their genitalia the slang term "junk?" Is that proof that they hate their bodies and their genitalia is something they would rather throw away. What exactly is the origin of using that term for genitalia?

Is it just the English language run amuck?

 

[2322]

What's with guys calling their genitalia the slang term "junk?" Is that proof that they hate their bodies and their genitalia is something they would rather throw away. What exactly is the origin of using that term for genitalia?

Is it just the English language run amuck?

I think it's a derivative of, "junk in the trunk." It seems the terms appeared at the same time.

Interesting that while I looked this up, I discovered a male genital wash named, what else? Man Junk. From their ad copy:

Men sweat. Not the hot sweat that women get going out on the dance floor, but the rank perspiration that makes any interested party turn 180 degrees and make a beeline for the door.
It might not be right, but it's the way the world (and the law of first impressions) works.
Luckily, you've got Man Junk as a wingman.
​

Note again here that women's sweat is sexy while men's sweat is gross despite the fact that many women (and men) find sweaty men sexy. Granted they're trying to sell their product here but the fact that what they're saying isn't remotely controversial illustrates the CW that men think their bodies are naturally nasty.

 

[Primal_Savage]

I think it's a derivative of, "junk in the trunk." It seems the terms appeared at the same time.

Interesting that while I looked this up, I discovered a male genital wash named, what else? Man Junk. From their ad copy:

Men sweat. Not the hot sweat that women get going out on the dance floor, but the rank perspiration that makes any interested party turn 180 degrees and make a beeline for the door.
It might not be right, but it's the way the world (and the law of first impressions) works.
Luckily, you've got Man Junk as a wingman.
​

Note again here that women's sweat is sexy while men's sweat is gross despite the fact that many women (and men) find sweaty men sexy. Granted they're trying to sell their product here but the fact that what they're saying isn't remotely controversial illustrates the CW that men think their bodies are naturally nasty.

Interesting. Personally, I don't think that the male body is nasty. Then again, I'm a real sweat hog. And finally, Man Junk sounds like a PR term or something that a man-hating woman would come up with; much prefer Jewels!

 

[B_quietguy]

Interesting post, Jason. It touches on a topic I've wondered about for years. Why do a lot of straight guys want to hit on women for sex, but go berserk if a guy even makes a passing comment? It's not as if these guys show any grace when soliciting women for sex. Nah, they come across as really crude. I'd bet most women are put off by such crude and rude overtures.

Yet, these guys will treat women the way they don't want other men to treat them! Whatever happened to "Don't do to others what you don't want done to you."?

 

[Meniscus]

I've got a bit of a headache, so I don't have the energy/motivation to respond to everything that has been written so far, but I will share a few of my thoughts.

Sexism is the root of heterosexism.

In our culture women are the 2nd sex. I'm not saying that's the way things should be, but it's the way they are. Sure, we've made a lot of progress towards gender equality, but we still have a long way to go. Although women go to college and have careers and can even take leadership roles (i.e., they can be CEOs and doctors not just secretaries and nurses), there is still this insidious notion that women exist to serve, support, and provide companionship to men. Oh, and to have their babies. Men, on the other hand, live for their own sake, for their own benefit. The companionship of a woman is just one of life's pleasures, like good food, fine wine, and money, property, and prestige. She's a prize to be won and shown off to ones peers.

There is also the notion that men and women are meant to pair up, not as equal partners, but in a hierarchical relationship, with the woman in the secondary position, as if nature provided for every man a personal assistant. A man is complemented and completed by a woman. A woman has no purpose without a man.

By servicing other men sexually and supporting them emotionally, gay men in some sense adopt a feminine role, thereby giving up their natural status as men, which is pretty much the worst thing any man can do. But they're not women, either, lacking the qualities (e.g., beauty) and abilities (e.g., child bearing) that hetero men do not see in themselves but enjoy in their mates. In some sense a gay men are something less than women, something "other." Thus the man who is serviced by another man hasn't got much of a trophy to show off--he can't even get a real woman!

Then when you consider that a gay male couple consists of two men, neither of whom have (or want) a proper mate (i.e., a wife), both of whom service other men, it becomes impossible to determine who is the husband (leader) and who is the wife (servant) because that whole relationship model goes out the window.

For reasons which I don't have the energy to go into, gay male relationships are not only threatening to individual men, but they undermine the entire social order. Hence, we see in a large percentage of the population the deeply held belief that marriage IS between one man and one woman, and massive opposition to same-sex marriage.

 

[2322]

Interesting point Meniscus. I'm a bit tired at the moment so I too am go to beg off the heavy thinking. I will say this one thing though. We have a gay couple in our little town and they've been part of the social circle for some time. It's pretty obvious who is (ahem) the man and who is the woman. I've actually heard other men ask, "Which one is the girl? HA HA HA," and that's always good for a laugh around the club bar with other men around. This illustrates that the husband, the one everyone takes to be, "the man," gets a lot more respect than his partner. Granted neither of them get invited to straight male group activities, but when they're at parties or working volunteer jobs, the one is treated more openly and more like other men. His more effeminate partner hangs out with the faghags and is nearly always excluded from more serious conversation. It's like these very trad straight men see the one man (whom they perceive to be more masculine (the penetrator)) most like them as more acceptable because he mirrors much of their behavior.

 

[2322]

There are a lot of good replies here and when my IQ gets back above 100 I'll be happy to address them. I am, sadly, at work and need to stay awake for the next 5.5 hours. Blech.

 

[BobLeeSwagger]

Homophobia and misogyny are closely related. The people who can't tolerate a man being attracted to another man are often the same ones who support obsolete gender roles. This is what's behind the anti-gay marriage folks who claim it's all about protecting "traditional marriage" and not oppressing gays. For them, traditional marriage means a husband is in charge and the wife does what he says.

 

[D_Pubert Stabbingpain]

Interesting. Personally, I don't think that the male body is nasty. Then again, I'm a real sweat hog. And finally, Man Junk sounds like a PR term or something that a man-hating woman would come up with; much prefer Jewels!

I'm in agreement with Primal Savage on this one. Most advertising literally reeks of misandry (hatred of men) and I have talked about this on another thread. There are many books written by men as well as women about how advertising runs the gamut from displaying men as hopeless and women always coming to the rescue. Men were not even considered to be "sexy" until the last decade but still men's genitals are considered to be funny-looking and foul-smelling.

Yes generally, men smell different than women. It is a built-in biological sexual attractiveness.

Sweat was considered to be "manly" and only men were allowed to sweat. Now, men and women have to be clean and fresh, then spray on perfumes that basically mimic sweat smells and ads make sure they use a spray bottle on models before and during the photoshoot to make it look like they are sweating. It's all PR.

 

[Steve26]

I have a feeling this is a really interesting thread ... will there be a Cliffs Notes version? Something with bullet points, perhaps?? :biggrin1:

Steve (who also struggles to keep it concise!)

 

[D_Pubert Stabbingpain]

Interesting point Meniscus. I'm a bit tired at the moment so I too am go to beg off the heavy thinking. I will say this one thing though. We have a gay couple in our little town and they've been part of the social circle for some time. It's pretty obvious who is (ahem) the man and who is the woman. I've actually heard other men ask, "Which one is the girl? HA HA HA," and that's always good for a laugh around the club bar with other men around. This illustrates that the husband, the one everyone takes to be, "the man," gets a lot more respect than his partner. Granted neither of them get invited to straight male group activities, but when they're at parties or working volunteer jobs, the one is treated more openly and more like other men. His more effeminate partner hangs out with the faghags and is nearly always excluded from more serious conversation. It's like these very trad straight men see the one man (whom they perceive to be more masculine (the penetrator)) most like them as more acceptable because he mirrors much of their behavior.

Quite true that a culture continues to reject that part of its own that is responsible for the entire liberation movement (Stonewall drag queens).

And it is also ironic that the person to whom most gravitate is usually the one taking the exact opposite role in bed! :biggrin1:

I still think however, at least considering your original post, that the issue is internal homophobia. Heterosexism is assuming that all people hold the same heterosexual values and act like and hold the same attractions and relationships as different-gendered couples. I think that "wanting" them to be or act more masculine has more to do with acceptance of "the other" (feminine) and recognizing and accepting that "other" within yourself. *Consciously* failing to do so is internal homobphobia.