Metal Reviews

Acting like their only value is in being fucked makes them objects. This is more pointed at you acting like they are idiots only good for sex.

I fail to see the connection. Sex and their sexuality in itself are very valuable things, worth a great deal of respect for their own sakes.

Coercion may be too strong of a word. This is just your preference whatever. I think it's an atrocious desire but I'm probably in the minority.

Sexuality isn't as expressive as you're making it sound especially if you're just fucking someone you just met which you have no connection whatsoever to and would desire even less from since you want to throw out the idle chit chat.

But they shouldn't be the sole value in a person. That makes them a blow up doll, a comparison especially apt with how inane and stupid you make them seem.

Well, of course the experience of sexuality is entirely subjective. If you're thinking that I only care about sex and don't give a shit about other attributes women have, then you're dead wrong. However, I don't expect to find those other attributes in a club. That's it.

But what if that is the sole value in a person? Sorry, I might be a misanthrope, but I take what I can get. It doesn't matter what should or shouldn't be. What do they offer? What can you take? What can you give back?

EDIT: Oh, and LOL at the thread title change.

Instrumentalizing humans is horribly immoral. I guess secular humanism isn't your shtick. If you're rejecting morality then why are you arguing against me calling something immoral? My morality can't be rooted in obscure religious origins either because as we know Western religions don't give a fuck about women so don't pull that on me. I believe that humans will never be simply reduced to fucking as their sole value. That leads down the slippery slope of legitimizing pimps treating women like "hoes" with all the abuse that comes with, domestic violence being an acceptable response to a frustrating woman whose only value is to be fucked, and basically any old testament style "stay in the kitchen" attitude where the woman can attempt to run the house with the keen supervision of her husband.

BTW I love the new thread title.

But that's all based on your assumption that my position or attitude is in fact an "instrumentalization" of women. It only appears that way if you detract from the worth of sexuality as a singular, powerful personal element. I.e, Sexuality isn't important, so suppressing all other forms of expression for a basic pleasure like sex is bad. I would agree- if sexuality were in fact something like that for me and my cultural perspective.

As for ethics- What I reject is the blanket statement that sexuality somehow occupies an abnormal status among human activities or forms of expression. If you feel that a girl's sexual value must be treated a certain way, back it up. Saying it needs to be protected and covered up and treated with care goes down the slippery slope of forcing burqas to "protect them" or lobbing of clitorises to maximize the matrimonial relationship. Nor is viewing certain girls has having worth only in light of their sexuality an automatic catalyst for domestic abuse and whatnot.

The main point I'm trying to make is that emphasizing or even isolating the sexual worth of a person isn't (or shouldn't be, at any rate) e "reduction" of their overall worth.

My experience with sex albeit anecdotal is that the value isn't in the act but in the person you're with. So to me, there is no inherent value or expressivity in the sexual act barring any emotional connection beforehand.

I'm not attempting to give an abnormal status to sex I just think that there is more that goes into it then just physical exertion, an emotional element to some degree. To say a person can be used for just sex is abusive due to that emotional element. Hmm, I can't define this emotional element but I think most would agree with me that there is a 'je ne sais quoi' aspect to the whole business.

I can see how this could seem protectionist but it really isn't because it's not circumscribed to a single sex or group. Everyone should value sex and beware the abuse of it. Reducing societal relations to simple physical desires or strains is what I'm attempting to prevent.

If you don't accept that treating a women as a sex object is instrumentalizing them then you are certainly not going to agree that it leads to the denigration of women in other aspects as simple objects to be used, soiled and trashed.

The way you've described these women in clubs as idiots makes it seem like you have reduced them to having just a sexual worth, no?

I don't think we've ever debated; I think we're both to stubborn to drop this.

You know what's awesome? All the girls in the club who look at Frigid and think, "What a pretentious psuedo intellectual prick. The only thing he'd be good for is a lay."





Oh, and the whole club scene is absolute bullshit.

i dont want to have children

use a condom.

yeah but I'm beyond sexually/emotionally repressed by now. I think I could be gay.

are you attracted to men? because then you wouldn't have to worry about having children.

a) Fine with me.
b) How would they know I'm pretentious if I don't talk to them?
c) Irrelevant, as I'm a smooth motherfucker. I look good in my Pretty Green outfits and indie afghan scarves.

Yeah, except I'm gonna have to drop it now. Schoolwork and all that.
Pleasure, anyway. I think we're closer to agreeing than we think.

I'm not attracted to men.

I don't really know though because I'm insane.

If you're a guy and you're not attracted to men, I don't think you're gay. Even if you're not all there, if the thought of some guy rubbing his hairy body on you bothers you then you're probably not gay.