What is the objective thing? I'm lost.
Sex With Ugly Men
- Thread starter wallyj84
- Start date
What is the objective thing? I'm lost.
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
Warning: wall-o-text post incoming. Apologies, hopefully there's enough nuggets of insight in here to warrant the time it takes to read it.
As expected, Wally's just attempting to parrot and repurpose points I made earlier (that he misunderstood) to try scoring some "w"s for an argument with a flawed premise. Nothing worth giving attention to
I know it can be frustrating because of the optics of how it looks to be publicly checked on some things you say when so many idjiot men want to see the feminists here take an L, but I hope you keep in mind I'm not calling out any personal truths or lived experience you have. I was hesitant to believe your personal definition of attractiveness at first because of how frequently everyone (across genders, more or less) understates how much physical attractiveness matters (not in the sense of wanting someone to look like a supermodel, porn star or athelete - beauty standards have changed and diversified quite a bit over time - but the extent to which ideal partners can still be prioritized by sex appeal, height, weight, physical prowess, penis size, ass size, breast size and more, and some have less luck than others).
Also I intentionally replied in a provocative way at first to see what your reaction would be to get a sense of how genuine or not you were lol. There's no need to play offense for your defensive anymore, since I'm not making a personal judgement about you, and I apologize if I mischaracterized you. ^_^
At the end of the day, I just think it's reasonable to show skepticism when anyone says "it's all about personality for me, nothing else" since data on how gender and socioeconomics intersect and impact society contradicts how widespread genuine attitudes like that seem to be. Personal truth, objective truth, political truth and so on. I recommend watching online content creators and researchers like Ahrelevant, Rose Wrist, and Aba and Preach to get more perspective on this topic and a better sense of where my critiques are coming from (I know you said you dont care, but just citing my sources here if nothing else).
Really quick, I need to get meta and describe your actions, not just your words in this response: In response to my take that attractiveness (when considering things about appearance, status, class, etc) are measured via actions instead of what we commonly hear people say, you shifted the pendulum back a bit by sharing a personal opinion on the topic - a reiteration of the point i made earlier that attractiveness isn't purely based on physical appearance - and elaborating on how your personal definition of attractiveness is based on your emotional connection to someone and how well they take care of your body, work out, etc, that none of it is based in things beyond a person's control, and that everyone has some standards for attraction.
I think you need to be careful with using some of these responses as a retort to any talking points misogynists throw at you if/when you're ever judged by them for your preferences. Main issue: some of your preferences are based in things someone actually might not have much control over. Like when you say lifestyle, this could mean so many things and there are many, many factors beyond one's control that can determines theirs. Class, upbringing, wealth, opportunity of socialization, how idyllic or horrific someone's upbringing is - all things that have measurable domino effects that lead to lifestyles in adulthood. If you prefer someone who stays fit and active, even this isn't an option for everyone since you need to account for the natural differences in bodytypes (endomorphic, mesomorphic, etc) as well as height, time, ableness, medical conditions, etc. Even traits like how someone smells might be based on stuff they have little control over (natural odor, having a job that requires them to be around unpleasant smells, their living situation/what their house smells like, etc)
Regarding emotional connection: mental disorders (many of which tend to be shaped by environmental and genetic factors), sense or humor (someone with lower-functioning autism might seem to not have one, and come off as unemotional or unempathetic), things like where someone's at emotionally in their life at certain times...all factors to consider, many of which are beyond someone's control.
Long story short, the unfortunate reality is there are well-trained debate lord sexists out there who could easily weaponize optics to seem to take your response apart (using objectively true data repurposed for biased and harmful purposes).
I would say the more sound take is one in which you just own your preferences and frame it more as subjective likes/dislikes and what's harmful/harmless instead of the "my preferences are only based in things someone has control over, never stuff they don't" angle. I know there are issues with this as well because it can open you up to men lashing out at you and calling you shallow or something. I think when handled on a case by case basis though, most anyone who does this can be dealt with effectively by pointing out their insecurity and that you don't find insecurity or fragility attractive because they're measurably destructive and dysfunctional habits, and you don't want to deal with those behaviors in a relationship or date because of how harmful they are to you.
Oh, and I gotta disagree with the last point you made. Saying anyone with zero standards of attraction is admirable is a bit silly, don't ya think lol?
. I think it's perfectly reasonable to find someone with an athletic body more attractive (it implies healthier and longer life) or more wealth (more personal freedom, more exciting and eventful lifestyle), kinder disposition (less potential for abuse and harm), credibility (a professor vs some dude with less credentials) and even average-to-large sized dicks (some guys are literally too small for penetration, and lots of people want or even need that to have their best orgasms).
Whatever your preferences may be, it still reinforces why I think it's always best to frame them via things you like and dislike and what's measurably harmful or not, instead of the other criteria. Unfortunately there will be tons of preferences, even reasonable ones, that after becoming widespread and normalized will leave many out of luck. I think in general there should be more sensitivity to that and less assumptions that anyone who's faced with going so much of their life seen as undesirable had it coming since a lot of that is unavoidable - social pressures being put on anyone to date someone they're not attracted to is pretty unethical, even if their preferences are not the most sound.
Still, as far as I know you can only quantify dating preferences through a morally objective lens based on how harmful or not they are to you or anyone else. And I don't even think it counts as harmful if things just play out where many people are left behind for being viewed as undesirable - not much can be done about that. But I think if many are being left behind for things that are genuinely harmless and beyond their control it still needs to be taken into account. I think compassion if not empathy towards someone like that should be more normalized, though this is an unpopular take - mainly because we're in the midst of so much increasingly widespread toxic beliefs that keep spreading and gaining influence and it's tough to discern how many are being isolated and treated without care because of that, or more unjust reasons.
Looooong TLDR story sort, I'd say the takeaway from all this is things are far more multifaceted and complex that the "isolated men who complain about not getting laid are all toxic and attractive women with a decent quality of life simply always make good choices and have high standards" framing that many of the arguments here have. We haven't even gotten to the tip of the "lots of women considered unattractive are mistreated due to normalized attitudes of attractiveness" iceberg yet. I think things are framed in such an absolutist way here because so many of the men on this particular site ARE toxic lol. There's's very much a "pervy/trashy/hateful MRA men who are set in their ways vs feminist women who don't want to leave and are being forced to deal with them" dynamic that sets the tone of interactions between gender here, so I' get why we don't see more nuanced conversation about intersectionality and why the stakes might be too high to even have them.
As expected, Wally's just attempting to parrot and repurpose points I made earlier (that he misunderstood) to try scoring some "w"s for an argument with a flawed premise. Nothing worth giving attention to
I know it can be frustrating because of the optics of how it looks to be publicly checked on some things you say when so many idjiot men want to see the feminists here take an L, but I hope you keep in mind I'm not calling out any personal truths or lived experience you have. I was hesitant to believe your personal definition of attractiveness at first because of how frequently everyone (across genders, more or less) understates how much physical attractiveness matters (not in the sense of wanting someone to look like a supermodel, porn star or athelete - beauty standards have changed and diversified quite a bit over time - but the extent to which ideal partners can still be prioritized by sex appeal, height, weight, physical prowess, penis size, ass size, breast size and more, and some have less luck than others).
Also I intentionally replied in a provocative way at first to see what your reaction would be to get a sense of how genuine or not you were lol. There's no need to play offense for your defensive anymore, since I'm not making a personal judgement about you, and I apologize if I mischaracterized you. ^_^
At the end of the day, I just think it's reasonable to show skepticism when anyone says "it's all about personality for me, nothing else" since data on how gender and socioeconomics intersect and impact society contradicts how widespread genuine attitudes like that seem to be. Personal truth, objective truth, political truth and so on. I recommend watching online content creators and researchers like Ahrelevant, Rose Wrist, and Aba and Preach to get more perspective on this topic and a better sense of where my critiques are coming from (I know you said you dont care, but just citing my sources here if nothing else).
Really quick, I need to get meta and describe your actions, not just your words in this response: In response to my take that attractiveness (when considering things about appearance, status, class, etc) are measured via actions instead of what we commonly hear people say, you shifted the pendulum back a bit by sharing a personal opinion on the topic - a reiteration of the point i made earlier that attractiveness isn't purely based on physical appearance - and elaborating on how your personal definition of attractiveness is based on your emotional connection to someone and how well they take care of your body, work out, etc, that none of it is based in things beyond a person's control, and that everyone has some standards for attraction.
I think you need to be careful with using some of these responses as a retort to any talking points misogynists throw at you if/when you're ever judged by them for your preferences. Main issue: some of your preferences are based in things someone actually might not have much control over. Like when you say lifestyle, this could mean so many things and there are many, many factors beyond one's control that can determines theirs. Class, upbringing, wealth, opportunity of socialization, how idyllic or horrific someone's upbringing is - all things that have measurable domino effects that lead to lifestyles in adulthood. If you prefer someone who stays fit and active, even this isn't an option for everyone since you need to account for the natural differences in bodytypes (endomorphic, mesomorphic, etc) as well as height, time, ableness, medical conditions, etc. Even traits like how someone smells might be based on stuff they have little control over (natural odor, having a job that requires them to be around unpleasant smells, their living situation/what their house smells like, etc)
Regarding emotional connection: mental disorders (many of which tend to be shaped by environmental and genetic factors), sense or humor (someone with lower-functioning autism might seem to not have one, and come off as unemotional or unempathetic), things like where someone's at emotionally in their life at certain times...all factors to consider, many of which are beyond someone's control.
Long story short, the unfortunate reality is there are well-trained debate lord sexists out there who could easily weaponize optics to seem to take your response apart (using objectively true data repurposed for biased and harmful purposes).
I would say the more sound take is one in which you just own your preferences and frame it more as subjective likes/dislikes and what's harmful/harmless instead of the "my preferences are only based in things someone has control over, never stuff they don't" angle. I know there are issues with this as well because it can open you up to men lashing out at you and calling you shallow or something. I think when handled on a case by case basis though, most anyone who does this can be dealt with effectively by pointing out their insecurity and that you don't find insecurity or fragility attractive because they're measurably destructive and dysfunctional habits, and you don't want to deal with those behaviors in a relationship or date because of how harmful they are to you.
Oh, and I gotta disagree with the last point you made. Saying anyone with zero standards of attraction is admirable is a bit silly, don't ya think lol?
. I think it's perfectly reasonable to find someone with an athletic body more attractive (it implies healthier and longer life) or more wealth (more personal freedom, more exciting and eventful lifestyle), kinder disposition (less potential for abuse and harm), credibility (a professor vs some dude with less credentials) and even average-to-large sized dicks (some guys are literally too small for penetration, and lots of people want or even need that to have their best orgasms).Whatever your preferences may be, it still reinforces why I think it's always best to frame them via things you like and dislike and what's measurably harmful or not, instead of the other criteria. Unfortunately there will be tons of preferences, even reasonable ones, that after becoming widespread and normalized will leave many out of luck. I think in general there should be more sensitivity to that and less assumptions that anyone who's faced with going so much of their life seen as undesirable had it coming since a lot of that is unavoidable - social pressures being put on anyone to date someone they're not attracted to is pretty unethical, even if their preferences are not the most sound.
Still, as far as I know you can only quantify dating preferences through a morally objective lens based on how harmful or not they are to you or anyone else. And I don't even think it counts as harmful if things just play out where many people are left behind for being viewed as undesirable - not much can be done about that. But I think if many are being left behind for things that are genuinely harmless and beyond their control it still needs to be taken into account. I think compassion if not empathy towards someone like that should be more normalized, though this is an unpopular take - mainly because we're in the midst of so much increasingly widespread toxic beliefs that keep spreading and gaining influence and it's tough to discern how many are being isolated and treated without care because of that, or more unjust reasons.
Looooong TLDR story sort, I'd say the takeaway from all this is things are far more multifaceted and complex that the "isolated men who complain about not getting laid are all toxic and attractive women with a decent quality of life simply always make good choices and have high standards" framing that many of the arguments here have. We haven't even gotten to the tip of the "lots of women considered unattractive are mistreated due to normalized attitudes of attractiveness" iceberg yet. I think things are framed in such an absolutist way here because so many of the men on this particular site ARE toxic lol. There's's very much a "pervy/trashy/hateful MRA men who are set in their ways vs feminist women who don't want to leave and are being forced to deal with them" dynamic that sets the tone of interactions between gender here, so I' get why we don't see more nuanced conversation about intersectionality and why the stakes might be too high to even have them.
Last edited:
@Brianne_24
I could tell you were questioning my answers and that's what was bugging the fuck out of me. I don't need you to correct my responses, and that's basically what you were doing.
If I took the time to type the shit, it's not an exaggeration. It's not a lie. And I'm not here to answer for anyone but myself. I'm not "women". I'm me. So, as a woman who has individual thoughts on the topic, I answered. Then another woman questions how true it may or may not have been?
Fuck that shit. I'm calling what I smell.
I could tell you were questioning my answers and that's what was bugging the fuck out of me. I don't need you to correct my responses, and that's basically what you were doing.
If I took the time to type the shit, it's not an exaggeration. It's not a lie. And I'm not here to answer for anyone but myself. I'm not "women". I'm me. So, as a woman who has individual thoughts on the topic, I answered. Then another woman questions how true it may or may not have been?
Fuck that shit. I'm calling what I smell.
And, I think "ugly" people get fucked often enough that they're the majority. Conventionally attractive people are not representative of the majority of human beings. Most people are average as fuck, hence the term existing.
I'll take some ugly-man-dick if that ugly fucker has what it takes to make me cum after he makes me laugh. And maybe a sandwich.
I'll take some ugly-man-dick if that ugly fucker has what it takes to make me cum after he makes me laugh. And maybe a sandwich.
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
also apologies for how clumsily written it is, i'm sleep deprived and wrote/typed kinda fast. It's not the best read, but hopefully the points were communicated clearly
edit: just now saw your responses T_n_J, one moment...
edit: just now saw your responses T_n_J, one moment...
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
Nobody's saying you're not entitled to how you feel. I questioned how genuine your responses were at first for reasons that are sound. I think you're overreacting just a bit here, unfortunately. I'm not sure if it's because you think I made you look bad or what. I really didn't. Quick screening process aside, you're speaking for yourself, and I'm accepting it. Not sure what else to tell you.
"Ugly people get fucked most often because they're the majority"...I'm genuinely not sure what that means if I'm being honest.
And there will of course be some variance w/ what everyone pictures in their mind for the term "conventionally attractive". What would you say it means to you and what does average af mean?
I'm not overreacting. I'm bored and you keep talking so I keep responding.
I'm not angry. This just how I talk. My post history is evidence of that.
I think you're making *you* look bad, but whatever. I look like a fucking snack (basing my opinion of me on my posts, not my face or body).
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
I got what you meant, that elaboration at the end wasn't needed lol
At the end of the day I can't change how you feel. I don't think your reaction is totally fair but also I know there are plenty of factors/things about the stakes of conversations like this on a board like this which might contribute to the frustration behind your responses in this thread. I sincerely wish you well.
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
At least she admitted what she was doing. I did kinda call her on it, but hey... She could have pretended she wasn't trying to provoke me. She admitted it. So, I know where we stand now.
Going forward, if I reply in this section and it gets "corrected" or questioned I have this interaction to recall.
Sometimes other women post things in this section I have to question, but when I do it at least I come straight or the gate without beating around a bush. I don't half-assedly manipulate it out of them.
Oh, and if you're curious Brianne... I'm not overreacting now either.
I just had surgery recently and I'm stuck on my couch with nothing much to do so I've been pretty active here lately.
Don't flatter yourself to think I'm just obsessing over ya
I just had surgery recently and I'm stuck on my couch with nothing much to do so I've been pretty active here lately.
Don't flatter yourself to think I'm just obsessing over ya
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
My only retort is i'm not sure you're giving me enough credit by describing my manipulation abilities as half assed.
If you ever think you handled it poorly, you should see the folder in my cloud account w/ hundreds of screenshots of creepy DMs I have saved that document me tricking the senders into *actually* losing their minds, revealing their identities, fessing up to crimes, and all sorts of bonkers things.
Mkay. Have fun with that.
I'll be on the lookout for your next expose on what women want and are willing to admit and blablablabla. All posted without links to credited sources to back up your "information"... Cuz it's all your opinions wrapped up in long paragraphs and fluffy words.
Stay safe.
I'd be incredibly surprised if anyone thinks she's the one who handled the whole exchange poorly.
Brianne_24
Cherished Member
Lol, lack of links is a good point, I should be called out on it. Most of those sources were shown via the content creators pulling up the articles, documents, etc live on stream, and unfortunately I didn't aways find or save the link addresses. I have some links ready to c/p if it ever comes to it, though. If nothing else they're available in video and vod form on those streamer's channels and will definitely show up in future content as well.
Never got creepy dms from women...only men. Posting the screenshots in a thread here is something i'm honestly going back and forth in my mind about doing at some point, but nothing decided yet. It's so conflicting. I've been getting an increase in DMs and follow requests lately. As someone who admittedly likes attention...I suppose that's ok on some level maybe. Posting the screenshots might deeply upset some people here who seem to like me right now and are having fun sending such DMs to women...people who think I'm tolerant of them and speaking on their behalf any of the few times I've had disagreements with the other women here, i dunno.
Ugh, would be a shame...even the thought of it might be considered problematic by some perspectives...I can be such a bully logic lord sometimes. If I go through with it, I guess it's just gonna have to be one of those "gotta live with it forever" moments
Agreed. As w/ most disagreements/debates/etc she's had on here, she handled it well ^_^
Content creators? So you're finding this information on YouTube or TikTok and repeating it? You didn't save the links, did you even read into them or did you take it all at the word of these "content creators"?
I'm already questioning these sources.
Similar threads
