Active Now

Danilo_G
Malizz
Thebigd
Discussion » Questions » Human Behavior » With all the sexually perverted deviates being outed do you think NOW women will no longer be viewed as objects or pleasure toys? Seriously?
RosieG

With all the sexually perverted deviates being outed do you think NOW women will no longer be viewed as objects or pleasure toys? Seriously?

Doubtful. Humans won't change. They may pretend but what they actually think is probably rigidly present in their DNA. How much what is currently happening will impact future treatment of women is unknown at this time. We shall see won't we. I'm not betting on anything. Everything is possible. Nothing is certain. People are what they are. We move on and hope for the best but always try to be prepared for the worst.

Posted - December 9, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • I see a future where men and women are afraid to go near each other. Population control.
      December 9, 2017 3:53 AM MST
    3

  • 113301
    So it's all or nothing? Men cannot be reprogrammed to be respectful of women? Sad if true. Thank you for your reply Gk and Happy Saturday.
      December 9, 2017 7:30 AM MST
    1

  • hope you have a great day too. I think respect works with give and take. You’re being respectful to me so I’m respectful to you. I don’t think i was programmed to be respectful.
      December 9, 2017 7:51 AM MST
    0

  • 5391
    No. 
      December 9, 2017 5:24 AM MST
    2

  • 6098
    I really can't see any "sexual perversion" or "deviation" in any of this.  Can't believe you would be so naïve as to use such labels.  Pretty much just normal goings on between men and women.  In the 1980s and after I did a lot of work and protest vs. rape and sexual coercion but at that time I never imagined that would eventually come to include everything under the sun. All I see happening is a lot of women jumping on the bandwagon to get their five minutes of fame claiming to have been abused by a celebrity.  The real problems, the heart of the problems, are not being addressed at all .  Just a lot of silliness. 
      December 9, 2017 6:19 AM MST
    3

  • 44231
    Nice answer...you sound like my wife.
      December 9, 2017 6:44 AM MST
    1

  • 6098
    Yes?  Thank you.   I quite LIKE being a sex object.  Especially at my age.  Nor do I mind being a "pleasure toy" either as long as I am on board with that.  But I am of course many other things as well!  But the little dances and energies that go on between men and women  - aren't they so much of what makes life worth living?  Long as there is no coercion or pressure. 
      December 9, 2017 10:59 AM MST
    2

  • 44231
    What the heck...I flirt, they flirt back. No harm done and it never goes beyond that.
      December 9, 2017 12:23 PM MST
    1

  • 6098
    Well there's flirting and flirting. A lot of it is just as I said a natural part of the dance and quite automatic.  Anything more conscious I would be careful of and I think really constitutes an invitation. 
      December 9, 2017 1:08 PM MST
    1

  • 7280
    I like your outlook and emphasis on this. Men and women have "flirted" and always will---and probably 94% of that is acceptable, with the other 6% involving something that either is---or is considered to be ---unacceptable.  

    Vive la difference (exclamation)--- used to show that you think it is good that there is a difference between two people or things, especially a difference between men and women

    Sexual objectification is the act of treating a person as a mere object of sexual desire.

    In a typical relationship between a man and a woman that is progressing normally, most of the time each will come to see the other as an "object of sexual desire." 

    "One night stands" can be extremely unfulfilling if the hearts, minds, and bodies of the two involved do not reach out to one another."

    (And can you imagine a good marriage where neither party has any interest in sexual intimacy with the other?)
      December 9, 2017 1:49 PM MST
    1

  • 6098
    Thank you.  Call me Pollyanna but I could never take any man to task for trying or even the occasional touch or feel.  Long as it does not become threatening or coercive.   Of course a lot of men do try to make us uncomfortable by sexual talk and innuendo -  I would say to make themselves feel more powerful or get a rise out of us - but working alongside men we get used to that or should.  Interesting thing to me always is that men will also be more likely to be the ones to encourage us and compliment us if we do something well at work.  

    Oh who said anything about one-night-onlys?  Many if not most of us need lots more than one night to adjust to someone and let him adjust to us so things develop and get good or not. 

    Marriage I think needs to be more than just good sex to last - you have to really enjoy each other's company in other situations as well. 
      December 9, 2017 2:01 PM MST
    0

  • 7280
    I was raised to keep my hands to myself, so touching or feeling was never something I was comfortable with doing.  As I have aged---72--now, I wonder how men can feel free expressing appreciation for a woman's looks, or dress, or whatever without wondering if they have crossed some invisible line.  (Of course, I personally am not so worried since I'm sure I could defend myself against and comment I made by saying, "Hey, I'm too old to imply 'that.'"

    I mentioned one nigh stands because there is an old joke(?) among men that "the worst I ever had was wonderful."   That's simply not true. Neither of us was really interested, but got involved because it was somehow "expected"---and I was in my early 30's at the time.

    And I was implicitly referring to "mere" in the definition of sexual objectification.

    Sexual intimacy is not the same as good sex.  The intimacy that is a result of good sex is synergistic in nature and a marriage is less than it came be without that.


      December 9, 2017 2:15 PM MST
    0

  • 44231
    Why did you answer your own question?
      December 9, 2017 6:45 AM MST
    2

  • 5391
    Hypothesis: Personal affirmation of bias. 
     That, and so few others will.... This post was edited by Don Barzini at December 9, 2017 2:02 PM MST
      December 9, 2017 6:58 AM MST
    3

  • 44231
    Agreed.
      December 9, 2017 6:59 AM MST
    1

  • 3463
    No, nothing will change.
    It will just be same s@!t different day.
      December 9, 2017 10:50 AM MST
    1

  • 7280
    Disclosure is a 1994 American erotic thriller film directed by Barry Levinson, starring Michael Douglas and Demi Moore. It is based on Michael Crichton's novel of the same name.  The main focus of the story, from which the film and book take their titles, is the issue of sexual harassment and its power structure. (And Michael's on the receiving end.)


    Both men and women are sexual creatures and are hard-wired to mate. 

    Anything with a current flowing in it is subject to a short circuit or a power overload.

    The electrical code requires "GFCI's" (Ground fault circuit interrupters) in certain installations because of the likelihood of such occurrences.

    As long as we have houses powered by electric current, we will always have situations where the ability and / or  capacity of the circuit is exceeded---sometimes by accident, sometimes by willful disregard for (or lack of understanding of) the nature of electricity.

    There will always be Donald Trumps and Ray Moores around---and unfortunately, if you don't understand and respect electricity, there's always a lot of other stuff you just don't understand either.

    And such people usually don't understand the need of thinking about what they are actually doing before they do it---or worse, they know and just don't care.

    It's a basic (and generally disqualifying flaw) in their value system for people who would pretend to lead us.

    Edited to add: (And Michael's on the receiving end.)
    This post was edited by tom jackson at December 9, 2017 2:28 PM MST
      December 9, 2017 1:24 PM MST
    1

  • 46117
    In this SICK world, Rosie?
    No.

    I think that women will start becoming like Demi Moore in that wonderful movie with Michael Douglass.

    Did you see it?  I know you would enjoy it. 

    I will find it for you if I can.

    Women want to ape men in power.  They either have penis envy and want to be like a man like Trump, or they want to be a hanger on and just be a Stepford Wife like Melania. 

    (I KNOW SHE IS SO VERY SMART REALLY )  Sure.

    Anyway, they cannot come into their own and they don't know how to be a person of real power, so they ape the men.

    This means that women will have all their affairs and flirtations exposed. I hope they can take it. Because these WOMEN ARE ASKING FOR IT.

    You want to point the finger and cry rape at men ?   Fine.  But don't use it to get ahead even if the story might not hold water.

    Look at what they did to Al Franken.  They got it coming those beotches.  All of them.

    Disclosure

    is a 1994 American erotic thriller film directed by Barry Levinson, starring Michael Douglas and Demi Moore. It is based on Michael Crichton's novel of the same name.[2] The cast also includes Donald Sutherland, Rosemary Forsyth and Dennis Miller. The film is a combination thriller and slight mystery in an office setting within the computer industry in the mid-1990s. The main focus of the story, from which the film and book take their titles, is the issue of sexual harassment and its power structure.

    Plot summary

    Bob Garvin, a technology company founder, plans to retire when his company merges with a larger company. Production line manager Tom expects to be promoted to run the CD-ROM division. Instead, Meredith, a former girlfriend, is promoted to the post.

    Meredith calls Tom into her office to discuss some operations, and forces herself onto him. He initially reciprocates, but then rebuffs her. Meredith screams a threat to make him pay for spurning her.

    The next day, Tom discovers that Meredith has filed a sexual harassment complaint against him with legal counsel Philip. To save the merger from a scandal, DigiCom officials demand that Tom accept reassignment to another location. If Tom does this, he will lose his stock options in the new company. His career will be ruined as the other location is scheduled for sale after the merger which will leave Tom jobless.

    Tom receives an e-mail from someone identified only as "A Friend." It directs him to Seattle attorney Catherine, who specializes in sexual harassment cases. Tom decides to sue DigiCom, alleging that Meredith is the one who harassed him. The initial mediation goes badly for Tom as Meredith blames him.

    Garvin proposes that if Tom drops the matter, he will not have to transfer. This causes Tom to suspect that Meredith's accusations have a vulnerability. Tom remembers misdialing a number on his cell phone at the time of his meeting and Meredith throwing his phone (but not hanging up), thus inadvertently creating a recording on a colleague's voicemail of the entire encounter. Tom plays the recording at the next meeting and discredits Meredith. DigiCom agrees to a settlement calling for Meredith to be quietly eased out after the merger closes.

    As Tom is celebrating his apparent victory, he receives another e-mail from "A Friend" warning that all is not what it seems. Tom overhears Meredith talking to Philip that even if they slipped him through the harassment accusation, they'll make him look incompetent at next morning's merger conference. If the problems with the CD-ROMs are shown as coming from the production line, which is under Tom's responsibility, he can be fired for cause.

    Tom attempts look for clues in the company database regarding the talk he overheard. But his access privileges have been revoked. He remembers that the merging company's executives have a DigiCom virtual reality demonstration machine in a hotel room with access to company databases. He breaks in to use it, but as he gets into DigiCom's files, he sees Meredith is already deleting them. Not knowing what to do, Tom receives a call from a Malaysian colleague who gets Tom copies of incriminating memos and videos. They show that Meredith was conspiring with the head of operations in Malaysia, to change the plant and specifications Tom has implemented, so that problems with the CD-ROMs will harm Tom's career.

    When Tom makes his presentation at the conference and Meredith brings up the production problems, he shows the memos and a video exposing her involvement in causing defects with the hardware. Meredith says that Tom is mounting a last-ditch effort to take revenge on her.

    Meredith must now be fired by Garvin who passes over Tom and names Stephanie Kaplan to the post. Despite wishing for the position himself, Tom is pleased that his colleague has been promoted. Tom asks Stephanie's son, Spencer, if he knows a "A Friend". Spencer says he is Arthur Friend's research assistant at college. Tom realizes that Spencer accessed Friend's office computer, meaning Stephanie through her son is likely the "friend". Satisfied, Tom returns to his old position at the production division.

    This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at December 9, 2017 8:18 PM MST
      December 9, 2017 1:24 PM MST
    2

  • 32693
    That is a good movie. 
      December 9, 2017 8:19 PM MST
    0