So why wouldn't the guy go fishing using the same bait? It seemed to work at least once. Perhaps setting rules before yosu skeeze out on a one nighter would be in order. Incuntcievable.
any guy who would take offense to this article is a fucking scumbag at heart, end of story.
in this magical land of portland, all the women are expected to put out at every turn to our city's overwhelming "hip" population. it's fucking sickening. the third commenter guy is a perfect example. look at how he blew up at some trivial, altogether inconsequential detail of her rant; when, lo and behold, his icon is a picture of a drummer—likely himself. fucking gross, dude.
i've been kicking around the city long enough to realize that dudes well into their forties think the ol' fuck 'n' toss is just peachy, and they think they're entitled because they have four black-and-white photographs of decrepit buildings up at a coffee shop on 102nd and prescott, or because their band has a standing gig at some pisshole bar out in tigard.
i simply cannot believe that you fucking dorks have the gall to openly criticize a woman who prides herself in her self-respect and offers one simple statement up front: "i won't sleep with you for no reason." however, sometimes i forget that i live in portland—land of the entitled and worthless; a city that is filled with schmucks in campagnolo racing caps walking fixies down the sidewalk without a scratch on them. one woman makes a statement empowering herself and out come the pitchforks and torches. un-fucking-believable.
Seriously, I know that it doesn't seem too coherent, but I agree with her point. The few months that I was single in Portland, every guy I seemed to meet that wanted to be "friends" with me, really just wanted to fuck me and then ignore me. "But, but, I thought this was friends with benefits...why are you upset?" I'm upset because you never acted like a friend and haven't since I started fucking you. Girls don't necessarily want a relationship guys, but that doesn't mean you have to treat them less than human when they are nice enough to fuck your loser ass. Never have sex with someone you want to remain friends with, it rarely works out.
Awright, so what we've had so far was people who are commenting on how basically pointless this particular rant was, and people who are holding it up as some sort of powerful act of empowerment.
Yeah, if you don't wanna be somebody's fuckbuddy, then don't. How 'bout that? To say that all males want that is categorically bullshit. To say that people who read this and found it to be meaningless are all angry males is also silly. Good lawd, y'all.
hey mcfly... i understand your thoughts on the "hipsters", and also think pdx can be a little too precious looking in the mirror....
but i think you missed the point here.
it wasn't that she turned down this guy, but rather her tone about it.
we only hear her going off on some blokes - but i wonder what their side is? they did get her number, and though it isn't a promise for sex - it begins the dating ritual.
it sounds to me like she should be more selective in the guys she gives her number to. this doesn't exonerate the guys making rude passes at her though, but a guy calling from the bar drunk to ask her to join him sounds more inept than devious, and he didn't deserve this vitrol.
her attitude is lousy. she could take these passes and be amused or flattered, while still thinking 'men are such dogs sometimes' without the spewing of this rant to all of us.
there are some very honorable men out there too, as well as the women.
oh, yeah, fixies do look nice - but are simply dumb. unless you are on the track.
these guys are just trying too hard.
you think that a woman who turns down a guy "with attitude" doesn't "deserve" to be outraged about it? that is so impossibly ridiculous. the dude has her number. he obviously isn't some stranger.
see, this is how people interact on any normal plane of reality. a girl likes a guy, he gets her number, they talk to each other, they like each other—that's how stuff happens. when a guy gets a girl's number and he calls her up asking to fuck, and she gets outraged, it's obviously a complete betrayal of intent and has its roots firmly in portland entitlement. sorry. that's how it works.
any woman has the right to turn down any guy asking for sex for any reason with any tone. they want. when they give their number out hoping for a real human connection and are met with "let's fuck, sweetheart" they are allowed to be outraged. they don't have to be nice and let the guy down gently. are guys? if a girl that a guy deemed "unattractive" tried to hit on said guy, is he required to be nice to her? in a perfect world—yes. but this world is far from perfect.
if you read that—all three paragraphs, and that's what you took away from it, one of my only points which is entirely undebatable, then you must not be living in the same city as me—and if you are, i wish you weren't.
Yes! It must be the city! She should try another major metropolitan city; one that's not too close to another. The twenty-somethings in that city are probably going to be completely different in the way that they are here. Everyone knows that twenty-somethings are completely different from each other in every major city. She should try a different city where twenty-somethings have a totally different outlook on social relationships and know how to properly interact with each other when looking for companionship. Portland twenty-somethings are just so...
heymcfly, your bitterness is showing. what happened on some hookup of yours?
you rip apart el dulce for questioning a crazy, all caps statement that is a crime against the english language. he made no sexist statement, yet you attack him and make sexist attacks youself. yes, women can be sexist too, news flash. women can also be players and / or like friends with benifits, and some have even been known to late night text or lead a guy on, all news to your world view I am sure. this statement is entirely undebatable.
...and that it's actually kind of a bad idea to generalize about sex and gender. For instance, what might have been a halfway decent point on the part of this week's Anonie instead devolved into what basically became "I'M ALL DAT! YOU CAN'T GET WIT' DIS!" So that was disappointing.
Then we somehow forgot that yes indeed: there's women who are just fine with casual sex, and even initiate the Friends With Benefits thing their very own selves. But no: and if you disagree with that, you're an angry male, or something.
"the third commenter guy is a perfect example. look at how he blew up at some trivial, altogether inconsequential detail of her rant; when, lo and behold, his icon is a picture of a drummer—likely himself. fucking gross, dude."
You can't complain if your mouth is full of pussy ( or cock if thats your preference). Try loving a little more and bitching a little less and your outlook on life and the opposite sex might change for the better.
Ladies, men have become un-gentleman like because over the last 40 years we have allowed them to do so. Men are simple creatures that cannot seem to monitor themselves or their behaviors.
Everyone, we have all become a great deal more shrill and awful over the general run of Western Civilization. Anyone claiming to have cornered the market on civility is lying for purposes entirely their own.
lovelyme... i couldn't disagree with your view more. my way of looking at the sexes is that men are always trying to keep up with womens ever-changing attitudes.
i mean, i view the 'sensitive' man of the 70's as a direct response to the womens lib movement of the late 60's. then the women tired of the man who was always crying on her shoulder, and then longed for more of a 'real' man, thus the hyper-masculine dude of the 80's to early 90's...
i'm sure the influence goes both ways, but...you spoke of un-gentlemen like behavior. - over the last 40 years, no less... i wonder if your memory even streches that far back - but
there was a time when is would appear to be condescending to a girl to simply open her car door for her.
but i like to think there are still plenty of guys out there for whom some degree of chivalry is not dead.
and 'rich-bachelor', while i agree no sex has the market cornered on civilty, i wonder if perhaps we all have been shrill throughout the ages... that, to a large degree, things were just as nasty before, and the proliferation of 'jerry springer' and reality shows is just a sign we are becoming more tolerant of what was always there. i wonder...
i think Rainer Werner Fassbinder said something once like he thought that women were in a sort of 'privaledged slavery', but would also use this oppression as a terror tactic at times...
maybe i got his thoughts wrong though...
but my fave borrowed thought on the continuing struggle of the sexes to find some understanding is by Orsen Welles, in that Jaglom film 'someone to love', where this director (jaglom) invites a bunch of singles, on valentines day, to a theater that is about to be torn down, and just asks both the women and men 'why are you alone?' ' has your expectations of love changed over time?' ... and so on....
so, jaglom talks to orsen about this problem of men and women trying to stay together and such, and orson says something like that women are trying to achieve what men have been notable failures in : to be completely content with ones profession while at the same time completely satisfied in the home, their hearthside - and why should women think they could do it any better than men?,
he goes on to say that with womens rights and such - we are essentially we are freeing the last of our slaves.... and that every higher form of civilization throughout time has been dependant on some form of slavery - and it is still not clear that it will work.
so then jaglom asks orsen 'well, what are we men to do?'
orson : 'put on your apron and shut up'.
Frankieb..I totally enjoyed reading your thoughts. I would like to say I posted what I did to purposely attract such a wonderful response..but, shamefully, it was typed on the fly due to my recent rash of girlfriends going through verbal abuse by their partners..leaving me wondering why they tolerate it.
Yes, def women's liberation movement starting changing the game in countless different ways, thus leaving an outcome of all kinds of madness and gender role confusion. Yikes, did I just say that? Another thoughtless sentence. Ha! However, the bottom line is we are human beings and we should all treat each other with respect. Period. It goes both ways.
I graduated highschool in the 80's and I guarantee you..the guys were no where near hyper masculine. Well, I take that back..my brother was. :) But really, I am just one person, in a space the size of a yoctometer..what the fuck do I know?
Frankieb, Frankieb, Frankieb..you have let the media inside your head! Shit shows like Jerry Springer exploit idiots that are desperate for some money. They solicit them..offer them more money they can make if they sold their trailer. Serious..Wife Swap..they pay their contestants $25,000 dollars. The catch is that the network can make you do or say anything once you sign those papers.
Perhaps so many people are so unfilled or weighted down by the world that they enjoy seeing people that are worse of than themselves even if it's not "real"?
Thank you for turning me on to Rainer Werner Fassbinder! A write up about him said he was "morally unrestrained"..according to societies collective rules. :) I plan on watching some of his films..after finals!
I absolutely adore your borrowed thought from Orson Welles, 'Someone to Love'. Another flick I will have to see!
This is a tad off the subject..I ran into this quote one night when I was contemplating the feeling of loneliness. It made me smile.
“We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and
friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not
alone.” Orson Welles
This is all too common in any transient, scenester society like the one PDX has become. Just like LA, NY, Miami, or Las Vegas... any show of real interest, emotions, feelings, ect... is highly frowned upon by this traveling group of lost mother fuckers. And the woman are just as guilty as the men. It's not a gender issue, it's a social problem you get when people without real lives congregate somewhere only to look good and be cool.
uhhh, thanks lovelyme!
that was sweet of you...
i'd boringly pontificate on my interpretations of some directors 'n shit... fassbinder.... the dude who considered himself a 'romantic anarchist'
(and not this bullshit 'protester-hiding-my-face anarchist' version either - if you feel strongly on something you put your face to it. Cowardly fucks...)
but i guess this ain't the proper forum.
i may never read this column again. That bad.
in this magical land of portland, all the women are expected to put out at every turn to our city's overwhelming "hip" population. it's fucking sickening. the third commenter guy is a perfect example. look at how he blew up at some trivial, altogether inconsequential detail of her rant; when, lo and behold, his icon is a picture of a drummer—likely himself. fucking gross, dude.
i've been kicking around the city long enough to realize that dudes well into their forties think the ol' fuck 'n' toss is just peachy, and they think they're entitled because they have four black-and-white photographs of decrepit buildings up at a coffee shop on 102nd and prescott, or because their band has a standing gig at some pisshole bar out in tigard.
i simply cannot believe that you fucking dorks have the gall to openly criticize a woman who prides herself in her self-respect and offers one simple statement up front: "i won't sleep with you for no reason." however, sometimes i forget that i live in portland—land of the entitled and worthless; a city that is filled with schmucks in campagnolo racing caps walking fixies down the sidewalk without a scratch on them. one woman makes a statement empowering herself and out come the pitchforks and torches. un-fucking-believable.
Yeah, if you don't wanna be somebody's fuckbuddy, then don't. How 'bout that? To say that all males want that is categorically bullshit. To say that people who read this and found it to be meaningless are all angry males is also silly. Good lawd, y'all.
but i think you missed the point here.
it wasn't that she turned down this guy, but rather her tone about it.
we only hear her going off on some blokes - but i wonder what their side is? they did get her number, and though it isn't a promise for sex - it begins the dating ritual.
it sounds to me like she should be more selective in the guys she gives her number to. this doesn't exonerate the guys making rude passes at her though, but a guy calling from the bar drunk to ask her to join him sounds more inept than devious, and he didn't deserve this vitrol.
her attitude is lousy. she could take these passes and be amused or flattered, while still thinking 'men are such dogs sometimes' without the spewing of this rant to all of us.
there are some very honorable men out there too, as well as the women.
oh, yeah, fixies do look nice - but are simply dumb. unless you are on the track.
these guys are just trying too hard.
see, this is how people interact on any normal plane of reality. a girl likes a guy, he gets her number, they talk to each other, they like each other—that's how stuff happens. when a guy gets a girl's number and he calls her up asking to fuck, and she gets outraged, it's obviously a complete betrayal of intent and has its roots firmly in portland entitlement. sorry. that's how it works.
any woman has the right to turn down any guy asking for sex for any reason with any tone. they want. when they give their number out hoping for a real human connection and are met with "let's fuck, sweetheart" they are allowed to be outraged. they don't have to be nice and let the guy down gently. are guys? if a girl that a guy deemed "unattractive" tried to hit on said guy, is he required to be nice to her? in a perfect world—yes. but this world is far from perfect.
you rip apart el dulce for questioning a crazy, all caps statement that is a crime against the english language. he made no sexist statement, yet you attack him and make sexist attacks youself. yes, women can be sexist too, news flash. women can also be players and / or like friends with benifits, and some have even been known to late night text or lead a guy on, all news to your world view I am sure. this statement is entirely undebatable.
Then we somehow forgot that yes indeed: there's women who are just fine with casual sex, and even initiate the Friends With Benefits thing their very own selves. But no: and if you disagree with that, you're an angry male, or something.
wow.
"the third commenter guy is a perfect example. look at how he blew up at some trivial, altogether inconsequential detail of her rant; when, lo and behold, his icon is a picture of a drummer—likely himself. fucking gross, dude."
just... wow.
Thanks for stickin' up for me! Fight gross drummer racism!
Enough of this "victimization" bullshit. It goes BOTH ways.
You can't complain if your mouth is full of pussy ( or cock if thats your preference). Try loving a little more and bitching a little less and your outlook on life and the opposite sex might change for the better.
Anyway, my advice to anybody is that if you really want to meet someone, stop trying to do it in bars.
i mean, i view the 'sensitive' man of the 70's as a direct response to the womens lib movement of the late 60's. then the women tired of the man who was always crying on her shoulder, and then longed for more of a 'real' man, thus the hyper-masculine dude of the 80's to early 90's...
i'm sure the influence goes both ways, but...you spoke of un-gentlemen like behavior. - over the last 40 years, no less... i wonder if your memory even streches that far back - but
there was a time when is would appear to be condescending to a girl to simply open her car door for her.
but i like to think there are still plenty of guys out there for whom some degree of chivalry is not dead.
and 'rich-bachelor', while i agree no sex has the market cornered on civilty, i wonder if perhaps we all have been shrill throughout the ages... that, to a large degree, things were just as nasty before, and the proliferation of 'jerry springer' and reality shows is just a sign we are becoming more tolerant of what was always there. i wonder...
i think Rainer Werner Fassbinder said something once like he thought that women were in a sort of 'privaledged slavery', but would also use this oppression as a terror tactic at times...
maybe i got his thoughts wrong though...
but my fave borrowed thought on the continuing struggle of the sexes to find some understanding is by Orsen Welles, in that Jaglom film 'someone to love', where this director (jaglom) invites a bunch of singles, on valentines day, to a theater that is about to be torn down, and just asks both the women and men 'why are you alone?' ' has your expectations of love changed over time?' ... and so on....
so, jaglom talks to orsen about this problem of men and women trying to stay together and such, and orson says something like that women are trying to achieve what men have been notable failures in : to be completely content with ones profession while at the same time completely satisfied in the home, their hearthside - and why should women think they could do it any better than men?,
he goes on to say that with womens rights and such - we are essentially we are freeing the last of our slaves.... and that every higher form of civilization throughout time has been dependant on some form of slavery - and it is still not clear that it will work.
so then jaglom asks orsen 'well, what are we men to do?'
orson : 'put on your apron and shut up'.
thanks for listening all...
Yes, def women's liberation movement starting changing the game in countless different ways, thus leaving an outcome of all kinds of madness and gender role confusion. Yikes, did I just say that? Another thoughtless sentence. Ha! However, the bottom line is we are human beings and we should all treat each other with respect. Period. It goes both ways.
I graduated highschool in the 80's and I guarantee you..the guys were no where near hyper masculine. Well, I take that back..my brother was. :) But really, I am just one person, in a space the size of a yoctometer..what the fuck do I know?
Frankieb, Frankieb, Frankieb..you have let the media inside your head! Shit shows like Jerry Springer exploit idiots that are desperate for some money. They solicit them..offer them more money they can make if they sold their trailer. Serious..Wife Swap..they pay their contestants $25,000 dollars. The catch is that the network can make you do or say anything once you sign those papers.
Perhaps so many people are so unfilled or weighted down by the world that they enjoy seeing people that are worse of than themselves even if it's not "real"?
Thank you for turning me on to Rainer Werner Fassbinder! A write up about him said he was "morally unrestrained"..according to societies collective rules. :) I plan on watching some of his films..after finals!
I absolutely adore your borrowed thought from Orson Welles, 'Someone to Love'. Another flick I will have to see!
This is a tad off the subject..I ran into this quote one night when I was contemplating the feeling of loneliness. It made me smile.
“We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and
friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not
alone.” Orson Welles
Thanks again for the great post!
that was sweet of you...
i'd boringly pontificate on my interpretations of some directors 'n shit... fassbinder.... the dude who considered himself a 'romantic anarchist'
(and not this bullshit 'protester-hiding-my-face anarchist' version either - if you feel strongly on something you put your face to it. Cowardly fucks...)
but i guess this ain't the proper forum.