Actually, no, she probably isn't. At least not from a very large group of people, who still think that women who take the liberty to have casual sex with more than one man and are being blunt about it, too, are sluts. If you really think society has changed reg. that, listen closely to what is being said. A woman fucking with many men? She's spreading STD's, she's a slut, she's easy. A man fucking with many women? Wow, cool dude.
This is still true in many circles but not nearly as much as in previous generations. Religion of course plays a role in the vilification of sex, but you wanna know who some of the worst slanderers are when a woman dares to be free with her body?
Other. Women.
There is no groups so vicious as a woman's own peers when it comes to casting judgment. Which kinda lends weight to Consumer's whole "crazy" theme.
Probably, yeah. But it is not because "we decide who's gonna fuck whom" - it's because if she says it, it's not very likely that said fucking will involve the man being dragged into a dark alley and raped because she is not willing or capable to accept no for an answer. Try and find, let's say, five women over 30 who have never been in a situation where a man started being threatening (as in roughly groping, stalking, or verbally abusing her) in connection with sex. Just five. If you can, I'll stand corrected, but I really doubt it.
You just proved my point. When I asked you to imagine a man, any man, saying the exact same thing Tisi did, your mind went directly to rape and violence. And the increasingly broad definition (that is, definitions invented by broads) of what constitutes "sexual harassment, verbal abuse, and unwanted advances) means that for every woman who legitimately was roughly treated there is a man who publicly trashed and accused simply because the woman he approached wasn't receptive to his version of "wanna fuck?"
In short, her game.
You know, this whole "men will fuck whoever and whenever they can, and that's why women wield power over them"... it's a load of bullshit. Men are just as capable of controlling their urges as women are. Yeah, fucking is an instinct, just like eating. You can control your urge to eat, at least for a few hours, aren't you? Yeah? Well, then don't tell me that you can't do the same with your dick. (and I do know a lot of men who can, so I am not just guessing here).
And yet your earlier post said exactly that. Joking aside, the urge to procreate is one of the strongest instincts of any animal, man included. To equate willing abstinence with skipping a meal is hilarious but appropriate. Because a few hours is about the limit for either activity. Yes there are people who are celibate, yes there are people who go long periods without fucking. But the urges are still there, and it does not change my assertion that if a man wants to have sex, he will be required to "jump through hoops." Not always the same hoops, not always tough ones, but every man here knows exactly what I mean.
Case in point: how many women can say they've decided to go out on the town without a dime in their pockets, did exactly that, and had a grand old time complete with freeflowing drinks, dancing, and all the party company they wanted? I guarantee every woman here has done it or knows someone who has.
Now the fellas: how many of you have ever been able to go out to the club without a bankroll and still have the party last all night?
Nobody? Yeah me neither.
Just because generations of men and women have told the lie that it's not possible doesn't mean you have to believe it.
There is a reason old sayings become old. There is truth in them.
If fucking a woman is so incredibly important that you let her make you jump through hoops - it's your own damn fault.
Yep, pretty much. But it IS the most important thing in the world, we WILL put up with pretty much anything to get it, and women WILL keep taking advantage of that.
Yes, the game will stay. Wanna know why? Because we are telling the next generation the same old shit about how women are like this and men are like that, and nobody seems to notice that we are brainwashing them into playing the same bloody games that we so loathe.
The whole nature vs. nurture argument? I don't buy it. There might be a case for saying mass media encourages the "female princess, male caveman" stereotypes, but those stereotypes CAME from somewhere. If Disney movies starring beautiful would-be princesses and their heroic if slightly brutish princes weren't hugely popular...
Disney wouldn't keep making them. Simple as that. Media doesn't dictate social meme, it's the other way around.