RicoADF said:
All the time, media like those pictures have women expecting men to look like that and thus alot wont accept a guy that hasnt got a 'six pack', too many women are shallow.
As opposed to men, who care nothing for physical appearance. You can tell this by the fact that all media designed for heterosexual men shows perfectly normally proportioned women with relatively typical features and a range of body types.
Anyone who actually has a six pack will tell you how incredibly difficult it is to get and maintain. It's not even a case of working out, to look like the guys on those covers requires an abnormally low level of body fat which means a very controlled diet - unless you're a male model or a professional athlete it's an incredible sacrifice.
If you're being rejected by women because you don't look like those images, then either leave those women to a lifetime of perpetual loneliness or stop hitting out of your league. You're better off for it either way. If a female friend called you up and told you a guy rejected her because she wasn't size zero, you'd tell her (correctly) that he was a dick and she should forget about him. Do the same, and move on.
Calm down and remember that
Robert Pattison is considered attractive.
RicoADF said:
There's alot of sterotypes against men which can make getting a job hard, as well as other day to day activities. Have you had police follow you when your driving not because your a bad driver, but because your a young male driver, and thus by law must be a hoon that does burnouts and drifts. Women aren't the only ones that get harrassed &/or discriminated against.
What 'stereotypes' are these?
Notice, for example, that you had to qualify your only example with the term 'young'. Also notice that the vast majority of the policemen who make these judgements are not women or romance novel readers.
People can be stereotyped along all kinds of axes, but I really don't think you have very much to go on if you're claiming you can be negatively stereotyped as a man in any field except for childcare. The fact is that people interviewing you for jobs aren't generally judging your ability based on how aesthetically pleasing they find you or sizing up whether they might be able to sleep with you somewhere down the line.
RicoADF said:
I've seen romance movies, and as I said above their not uncommon, and yes romance movies/novels do work towards causing some of these issues (as well as other media) as they tell women to only accept men that look a certain way, not their personality etc. I doubt you noticed the men in such movies are always perfectly attractive
I intensely disagree. The average woman in an action movie is perfectly attractive, says almost nothing and is generally written into the plot as a highly formulaic afterthought. Romantic movies, on the other hand, almost always characterize their male characters. It may be in broad strokes or simplistic narrative archetypes, but that in itself is not objectification unless it is exceptionally crass or formulaic.
Objectification is when a person is treated as a commodity, as something which exists solely for the use or benefit of someone else without regard for their feelings. Fantasizing about a romantic relationship or even a sexual scenario in which someone else consensually wants to have sex with you is not objectification, even if it's unrealistic or based on an idealized fantasy, objectification refers to the deliberate erasure or neglect of volition or context, obfuscating the specifics of why someone wants to have sex with you or dress in a skimpy outfit.
Even when objectification definitely happens (and for the record I think it is happening on some of those covers, though probably not in the books themselves) it is not necessarily bad. The anti-pornography movement never argued that men simply shouldn't be allowed to look at porn because porn itself was degrading, the argument was simply that porn contributes to a wider culture in which the real life sexuality of females was commodified and exploited.
To be blunt, it doesn't matter what people fantasize about. It matters when those fantasies have real repercussions. Misogyny (and the belief that women are sexually passive witless drones who just want a good seeing too) is a real thing, you can look around the internet and find choice examples everywhere. The question is, are romance novels leading to a culture of exploitation and sexual violence against men?
Can I also ask quite a direct question.. when you say 'accept' do you mean 'fuck'? Because if so I find the implications slightly disturbing.
RicoADF said:
Yes a type of relationship thats just a fantasy and then the women expect that from their men, even the unrealistic parts.
So? Having unrealistic expectations isn't a crime..
Most straight men would love their partners to be different, often in much more humiliating ways. In my limited experience, women are more likely to wish their partners were more considerate or performed better at sex than to wish they had a rippling six pack.
RicoADF said:
Women look for muscles as it shows a healthy and strong mate which could provide for the family and the male looks for a healthy women that can provide healthy children, both cases are instinctive sexual desires based off what use to be benefits/ways of judging the viability of a mate, and are equally as objectifying and shallow as eachother.
..and then Robert Pattison leapt in through the window and told you to stop generalizing and second guessing what women want. Human sexuality and desire is complicated and highly individual and social expectations as to what makes a good mate often change across cultures and from generation to generation.
The fact is we know almost nothing about what people are 'instinctively' likely to go for and caveman dating rules are generally guestimated or made up by people trying to sell you middle brow books.
Robert Pattison, away!
RicoADF said:
I had to reply as it really irritated me to see someone have it so one sided and be so blind to what it's really like, the grass always seems greener on the other side. Women get alot of benefits in the law over men, altho that (atleast in Australia), is slowly equalising, it isn't all against women, it's quite scewed towards them, so stop crying your so hard done by and men get it so easy when in reality theres alot of work that needs to be done for both sides of the fence.
Check my profile again.
Also, what benefits in the law are these?
