nothing is nuanced about his behavior, for sure it is shit and controlling
what’s nuanced is how male relationships behave in modern western cultures(US specifically) and pointing out how a pretty woman is going to have a real hard time finding genuine male friendships
and snark aside most his friends are probably not interested in fucking him as only about 1/5th are openly gay
Even if you’re right that all men hit on her, he’s wrong that that means he’s the only man she can be friends with. Period. There’s no nuance to that, it’s just controlling. He can control her or he can love her, but he can’t control and love her.
Pretty women develop the skills to keep drooling men at arms length early on. The mistake is thinking that she hasn’t been picking and choosing so far and in thinking that control is the right response to the possibility of her choosing someone else. Either she leaves or she is at the very least emotionally abused, there’s no third option with a controlling man.
you keep trying to frame it like I don’t think he’s controlling or that I support his conclusion
as to pretty women developing skills all you got to do is read a bit on the internet or hell female biographies for that matter to see how bullshit that is
just because you develop tools to cope and defend yourself doesn’t mean it doesn’t fuck you up, some do ok but plenty don’t
so yea it’s gonna be really really really hard for a pretty woman to have honest male friendships, that’s the nuance, not the turd boyfriend you keep trying to focus this on
No, no, no, I didn’t say it was easy for her, I just think you completely lack nuance, balance, credibility and fairness when you excuse a position that pretty women can’t be trusted around men unattended. That’s not nuanced, it’s misogynistic.
There’s no nuance to “pretty girlfriend can’t be trusted to spend time unattended with other men”, that’s not nuanced, it’s blanket, it’s controlling, it’s relationship destroying, it’s toxic and it’s misogynistic.
I’m NOT arguing that it won’t sometimes be hard for her to fend off men who aren’t good at respecting women’s boundaries.
I AM arguing that you utterly LACK nuance when you talk like pretty women can’t have platonic friendships with men. It’s untrue. Not all men are rapists. Not all women cheat. You’re making a gross generalisation and it’s nasty and not at all nuanced.
If hypothetically you spent all your relationship talking to your girlfriend like she’s going to cheat on you, I think you would push her to live up to your expectations. After all, if she’s already done the punishment of hearing you lecture her about how she/women can’t be trusted around men, and you’re already giving her a hard time about keeping male friends, and you’re already forbidding male friendships she holds independently, and you’re already breaking up her preexisting friendship groups making it hard for her to plan/maintain a social life, and you’re already having the arguments about her unfaithfulness when she hasn’t cheated yet, she may as well cheat because she is already living the punishment and the destroyed trust. But in this scenario, it was you that destroyed it all on your own.
You keep pushing this attitude to women as nuance, but it’s like arguing that there’s nuance in “I permanently grounded my teen children all their lives, to stop them being drawn into taking drugs by their friends”. I mean, sure, ground them if they did drugs, but temporarily, because you can’t be the police of someone else’s entire social life, they’re going to escape that toxicity or you’re going to ruin their life. You can’t ground them as a permanent preventative measure, there’s no nuance to that, none at all, even though peer pressure is both real and powerful.
I completely reject your assertion that you’re being nuanced by claiming that because some pretty women and some men can’t be trusted, there’s some reasonableness or counterbalance in the scenario, and I reject your claim of nuance wholeheartedly when you talk like platonic relationships between men and women are the exception instead of the rule. Very very wrong indeed. Like excruciatingly wrong. Statistically way out. Most male/female relationships are platonic. Most pretty women are not sleeping around and most pretty women can be trusted, even around men in your absence. There’s no nuance to saying otherwise. There’s no nuance to using the existence of male rapists and unfaithful women to justify toxic and controlling behaviour. There’s no nuance to talking like petty women are inevitably going to sleep around. Stop using the word nuance to describe toxic misogynistic overgeneralisations.
if that’s what you want to take away from this go for it lol im done with what I wanted to say after
this
the nuance is that even crappy people can have worthwhile observations
that you can’t seem to get past his conclusions and separate the wheat from the chaff isn’t on me
that you keep trying to handwave this like women don’t massively have issues with platonic male relationships while we’re in a toxic masculinity post is again lol
women are choosing the bear but you think somehow it’s all better as friends?
the are so many examples of women complaining about this issue if you spend any time in female dominated subs
nothing is nuanced about his behavior, for sure it is shit and controlling
what’s nuanced is how male relationships behave in modern western cultures(US specifically) and pointing out how a pretty woman is going to have a real hard time finding genuine male friendships
and snark aside most his friends are probably not interested in fucking him as only about 1/5th are openly gay
Even if you’re right that all men hit on her, he’s wrong that that means he’s the only man she can be friends with. Period. There’s no nuance to that, it’s just controlling. He can control her or he can love her, but he can’t control and love her.
Pretty women develop the skills to keep drooling men at arms length early on. The mistake is thinking that she hasn’t been picking and choosing so far and in thinking that control is the right response to the possibility of her choosing someone else. Either she leaves or she is at the very least emotionally abused, there’s no third option with a controlling man.
you keep trying to frame it like I don’t think he’s controlling or that I support his conclusion
as to pretty women developing skills all you got to do is read a bit on the internet or hell female biographies for that matter to see how bullshit that is
just because you develop tools to cope and defend yourself doesn’t mean it doesn’t fuck you up, some do ok but plenty don’t
so yea it’s gonna be really really really hard for a pretty woman to have honest male friendships, that’s the nuance, not the turd boyfriend you keep trying to focus this on
No, no, no, I didn’t say it was easy for her, I just think you completely lack nuance, balance, credibility and fairness when you excuse a position that pretty women can’t be trusted around men unattended. That’s not nuanced, it’s misogynistic.
There’s no nuance to “pretty girlfriend can’t be trusted to spend time unattended with other men”, that’s not nuanced, it’s blanket, it’s controlling, it’s relationship destroying, it’s toxic and it’s misogynistic.
I’m NOT arguing that it won’t sometimes be hard for her to fend off men who aren’t good at respecting women’s boundaries.
I AM arguing that you utterly LACK nuance when you talk like pretty women can’t have platonic friendships with men. It’s untrue. Not all men are rapists. Not all women cheat. You’re making a gross generalisation and it’s nasty and not at all nuanced.
If hypothetically you spent all your relationship talking to your girlfriend like she’s going to cheat on you, I think you would push her to live up to your expectations. After all, if she’s already done the punishment of hearing you lecture her about how she/women can’t be trusted around men, and you’re already giving her a hard time about keeping male friends, and you’re already forbidding male friendships she holds independently, and you’re already breaking up her preexisting friendship groups making it hard for her to plan/maintain a social life, and you’re already having the arguments about her unfaithfulness when she hasn’t cheated yet, she may as well cheat because she is already living the punishment and the destroyed trust. But in this scenario, it was you that destroyed it all on your own.
You keep pushing this attitude to women as nuance, but it’s like arguing that there’s nuance in “I permanently grounded my teen children all their lives, to stop them being drawn into taking drugs by their friends”. I mean, sure, ground them if they did drugs, but temporarily, because you can’t be the police of someone else’s entire social life, they’re going to escape that toxicity or you’re going to ruin their life. You can’t ground them as a permanent preventative measure, there’s no nuance to that, none at all, even though peer pressure is both real and powerful.
I completely reject your assertion that you’re being nuanced by claiming that because some pretty women and some men can’t be trusted, there’s some reasonableness or counterbalance in the scenario, and I reject your claim of nuance wholeheartedly when you talk like platonic relationships between men and women are the exception instead of the rule. Very very wrong indeed. Like excruciatingly wrong. Statistically way out. Most male/female relationships are platonic. Most pretty women are not sleeping around and most pretty women can be trusted, even around men in your absence. There’s no nuance to saying otherwise. There’s no nuance to using the existence of male rapists and unfaithful women to justify toxic and controlling behaviour. There’s no nuance to talking like petty women are inevitably going to sleep around. Stop using the word nuance to describe toxic misogynistic overgeneralisations.
you keep attributing to me words I’ve not actually said lol
I’m neither the guy in the post nor whatever this strawman is you are building
reading these literal paragraphs of you arguing with yourself is kinda painful
At least this time you didn’t try to claim nuance where there is only extreme.
if that’s what you want to take away from this go for it lol im done with what I wanted to say after this
the nuance is that even crappy people can have worthwhile observations
that you can’t seem to get past his conclusions and separate the wheat from the chaff isn’t on me
that you keep trying to handwave this like women don’t massively have issues with platonic male relationships while we’re in a toxic masculinity post is again lol
women are choosing the bear but you think somehow it’s all better as friends?
the are so many examples of women complaining about this issue if you spend any time in female dominated subs