Gender-Specific Jealousy (Double Standard)

Tonberry

New member
I've heard plenty of Sallies say "I fucked Sam." In my grammar world, Sam cannot fuck Sally unless Sally fucks Sam back. Sam and Sally fucked each other. All night. *cue 80s wah-chicka-wah-wah*

Yes, I didn't point that out specifically, but I absolutely use "fuck" for "have sex with" and gender of any of the partners is irrelevant.
 

SchrodingersCat

Active member
I always think of fucking as a specific kind of sex. The opposite of "making love," which is all sensual and compassionate. Fucking is raw and crass. It's about needs and pure animal desires. But that's just how I think of it, and I'm by no means imposing those definitions on others' usage of the word.
 

Tonberry

New member
I see the act as the same, but the wording as different, I guess. It depends more on my mood when I describe the act than the way the act happened. But I can see that, too.
 
Last edited:

Marcus

Well-known member
I'm pretty embarrassed to admit this, but I think it's highly relevant to this conversation. I was on the bus today and I actually noticed something that I'd never really paid attention to before: I was assessing people differently based on their gender.

Gender is a pretty big distinction between individuals. I don't see how someone could *not* take gender into account when sizing people up instinctively.

People get too worked up about sexually objectifying other people, certainly when it comes to men objectifying women. If there are people out there who see a stranger and their minds don't assess them in any way ... there's something wrong there. That's not normal. What is normal is to be on the lookout for sexual partners and threats, and the quickest way to do this is to "objectify" people by assessing them.
 

Vinccenzo

New member
I don't think objectifying people is the same thing as assessing them. I think assessment is more about how we fit into the environment around us.

Assessment is done by acknowledging what clues the outer appearance of an individual tells us. It requires us to assess ourselves in the process. I'm sorry but you can't tell me a 6 ft tall woman is always looking at a 5'4" man and considering him a threat just because he is a man. I'm short so a 6 ft tall women could be considered a threat to me and a guy my size won't be seen as a threat to me.

I walk into a meeting room and realize I'm the only woman. I'm not going to consider who might attack me but I might take note of who is attractive. I walk into an alley behind a club for a smoke and realize I'm the only woman - I'm going to be on guard and not very concerned with who is attractive or not. If that same alley was full of nothing but women considerable larger than myself, I'd be in the same situation.

Objectification reduces the individual to a thing and what uses one might have for that thing.

I've noticed that the men I've known who had the most sexist attitudes were also the men who thought of sex as something they did to a woman rather than something they did with a woman. There was always this vibe of women being sexual victims rather than participants. Sex being something they had to convince women to allow more than it being something women would naturally want. I also notice it with the threesome thing. How often it is read "we met a woman and had a threesome and it went bad after that"? Yet she wasn't seen as a potential threat prior. Rarely so nonchalant in the choosing of a male addition.
 

BoringGuy

Banned
Wow i get assessed for gender regularly. Sometimes i see/hear little kids "whisper" to their parents "is that a lady or a man?" i am sure this kind of thing happens more often than i notice, because i have other things to do besides wonder what strangers on the subway make of my androgynous appearance.
 
Top