Ant-sex

11 May 2017 01:55 am
matrixmann: (Yuber Suikoden I)
Female voice:
Hi!
Saw you standing there.
You got a nice face.
Oh, you're not sipping on your glass?
Well, it's not the best place here.
Just the only one you haven't got to walk miles for to get there.
You wanna come with me and I show you a better spot?

Male voice:
Fuck you bitch,
save your tits,
tell me something I don't know!
I speak three tongues,
work a ton,
Baby, you should get some niveau!

Female voice:
You needn't have to be so rude!
Ts, should've known when seeing your coke instead of a beer
that something's wrong with you, guy!
Better save the drugs next time
and get some manners before you get so aggressive!
Which woman wants to go out with you?

Male voice:
(Who says that I want to go home with a female?)

Fuck you bitch,
save your tits,
try to tell me that I don't know!
You want a bang,
and some drink
Baby, the story's getting fucking old!

2nd male voice:
You turned her down pretty well!
How about the two of us going in a dark corner?
I think I know what you want...

Male voice:
Fuck you, dude,
before I puke!
Tell me something I don't know!
I cut myself,
wanted to kill
Baby, you should get some SM-Studio!

Fuck you, pal,
go to hell,
and please take your fucking tube with you!
You think I suck,
golden luck
Baby, I've had it with the likes of you!

Baby, I've had it with the likes of you!

Baby, I've had it with the likes of you!



Musical genre: Hardstyle (Electronic)
matrixmann: (Thinking)
Even though there's International Women's Day on March 8, never forget: As well as there are many kind and good-natured women who fulfill their duties faithfully and are always there in case of need, willing to help, there are also as many of them which make more of a resemblance to Goebbel's wife.

Activist

4 March 2017 09:11 am
matrixmann: (Waiting for command)
"...Human rights need to be preserved...!"
"Human rights - do you really know what this term means? Do you actually have an imagination in mind what it means when these are taken away from you? Do you fucking know what it means to daily awake in a cell, the guards clinging with their tonfas through the bars all over the jail and the first thing they do is beating you up before breakfast? Do you fucking know what it means to get raped three times a day by various people and they spit down on you, piss on you and laugh about you? Can you feel what it means to get played on and it's fun to your torturer to break your bones and see you scream? Do you have any idea how it feels inside to be exposed to the public, to get thrown dirt at and you know either when you don't do as the hosts say or not, the audience is gonna rip you to pieces? Can you feel how terrified you are in all these situations? Or when your Mom, 3 times taller than you, beats you up as a child and locks you in the dark basement as punishment for screaming from pain?
When you stand before a bunch of youngsters that wait to take the popcorn out of their pockets while you cut yourself, shout at them for teasing you everyday anew?"
"... ..."
"Before repeating this term over and over again, get the hell of aware what it actually means! It's not about democracy, freedom all these empurpled phrases! It's not about headscarfs and crosses, gender equality, and you being prefered for a job because you're a woman! It's not about something you can catalog and protect with paper and pencil or claim before a court!
It's about not waking up everyday and the first thing you experience is getting smacked in the face and treated like somebody's tool for pleasure! - when you walk on the street, you get shot for fucking nothing! when you try to be a man, but still get raped and molested because for some still you are a woman for all eternity!
Before you pamper around the next time about your wrong life decisions being "discrimination" or civilian death exists in war, think twice what you get excited about!
You go to university and even your parents pay your ass, some even need to kill to be able to go to school! Some even kill because of school, because it drives them mad!
You think you've seen something?! Fuck it, the only thing you've seen is your golden cage from the inside! And that's the way you act and think!"



Can be seen as a correction or addition to this one: https://matrixmann.dreamwidth.org/84431.html
matrixmann: (Thinking)
L'amour c'est un sujet compliqué.
Parfois tu dois fabriquer des compromises inhabituels et tu dois vivre avec le fait que tout ne pourrait pas convenir à l'image parfaite d'une relation. Tel que le plan de fonder une famille, la place de résidence, participants possibles complémentaires de la relation, et la profession et les hobbies du compagnon de ta choix.
En les cas durs, c'applique même á du sexe.
matrixmann: (Ready)
Lifestyles open doors to certain life decisions. Some are incompatible with certain decisions. Some also don't contain certain decisions. Literally, it's not on that path to be put to choose for certain things.
But, in return, they also open up doors to decisions that other lifestyles don't contain. Which you wouldn't be able to make - or options to choose between wouldn't be put before you, if you took another path.
In figuring one's own way to live, that's the point one must comprehend.
You can't have everything; you can't live a life with a family while you rather feel well when fooling around. You can't imagine to have big assets if you don't have the ambition and the brains to aim for any higher goals at all. You also can't do a traveling circus and work everywhere abroad and far away while there's somebody at home waiting for you and depending on you. As well... you can't live your secret identities and still think you can go the common path of getting married, having children and living happily ever after like all the other people.
Some paths are not the straight paths - and that's what one needs to know.
But, as said, those paths which are not compliant with the straight paths, the usual paths in life, they also have their special advantages. Pathways and forks that don't open up to the others that took one of those straight paths. Experiences that they are not going to make.
Disappointments they'll make conversely won't necessarily be the ones you will make.

One needs to take it as the strange winks of life that it sometimes has, and which it doesn't choose for long who it'll force them upon. It just lets them rain down, and it'll ask from you either to deal with them or to go down trying to pretend to yourself that you can still do the way that all the other people do.
Society on that path an also pretend to you a lot that there are various possibilities to combine both ways, the straight and the unusual one, but think twice if this is even realistic.
Nothing is a combination of both paths if you have to convince all of your environment that the way you do it is not harmful to the kids you gonna have.
matrixmann: (Ready)
Just an alternative way to approach the gender pay gap discussion:

Don't discuss that women don't get paid as much as their male collegues for performing the same job.
Better discuss that in capitalism each man can be paid a different wage than the other for doing the same job - and this is no crime.
matrixmann: (Thinking)
A note for a suggestion how to solve the misery when at least one parent isn't the biological ancestor (be it because it is an adoption inside a homosexual couple or an adoption by a couple which is unable to have kids together with each other):

Have one field in the birth application for the biological mother, have one field for the biological father - for the alimony issues, if both are available or can be detected, and for the sake of the child if he wants to meet the one of both he doesn't know (as often guaranteed by rights the state grants to a person to get to know his descent).
Then have another field in the application and in the birth certificate which states "otherwisely responsible care person in the juristic understanding of the rights and duties of a parent". And there you can enter whoever you want that gives his permission. A partner who's not a biological ancestor of that person, a person, like a close friend of the family, which is going to be responsible for the human mentioned on the paper like a parent in case one or both parents can't fully overtake this task or a concrete relative which is not in the direct bloodline grandparents-parents-child.
Additionally, this field should be extendable to more than one person - for the sake of couples being friend and people of trust to the biological parents.
And: It should be changeable anytime when both parties agree or when a court decision orders it.
matrixmann: (Yuber Suikoden I)
Fascism doesn't come loudly in slogans, symbols, rallies and violence.
It comes rather silently like in bans of thought, bullying, mobbing, shaming, comdemning, excluding, pointing fingers, throwing stones, ruining a person's life and bringing his public reputation into discredit.
And it can't be reduced to solely one political ideology. Leftists can be like that too. Those who call themselves "left" as well as those who are "left".
There's no more better proof than what takes place at the current time.
Leftists compete with each other in cleaning major power's butts, in taking the displaced people in these imperialists actually had to feed and pass the costs and the troubles on to the regular people, celebrating themselves as heroes and "good humans" while all others who point at this being no war-solving strategy get accused of Nazism because they don't join in the choir.
Leftists fight for the EU even though they know what capitalist monster it is that only exists for transnational interests to keep markets ready for them - and they snap at those which want to get out of it.
Leftists demand equality, but on the other hand they police peoples' minds again that you ought to treat a person which has a darker skin color than a Central European with more regard for a crime than someone from their own countries - if you want to convict him even though like all other people, you are an evil racist.
It's like fucking kindergarten! The interests of the workers - their classic metier -, it's come down to an accessory. Try to see them mobilize ten thousand people to cause a turmoil before a townhall for a better treatment inside the factories - they rather get it done to organize ten human chains to set an example against emotionalizing topics like racism and homophobia and "saving democracy". Abstract topics which nobody demands from you to be able to see concrete action.
Even though all colored people and all homosexual people go to work too.
And saving freedoms - well, there you took a topic which you can hear appeals everyday about, regarding the anti-GDR-, the anti-Soviet-propaganda that wants to make you think people can solely live of "freedom" and fresh air. Another one of those topics which you question about "You all got no other problems than "being free"? No problems to pay your rent, no problems to get by during the month, no telling this to a child "we're poor, we can't afford that"? No racking your brains about how to pay food?"
Just do your part in the distraction-plan to lure people away from topics that really affect all their lives. Just try to go on selling to the regular people that all they need is even more refugees, even more social diversity, even more multi-colored parades and even more trying to save the world instead of doing something at your own doorstep! Go on telling them what they don't need is that from the profits of the rich there need to be more drops down to the workers that generate that gain! Go on with all that abstract bullshit that doesn't even cover all important minority groups!
If you wanna kick somebody's ass - fucking go to the parliament and force them to finally officially declare "civil union between two people of the same sex now is called marriage"! Force them to revise that fucking law for gender transition that nobody's touched since the 80s to make it get a realistic shape appropriate to the circumstances of today!
Stop your fucking "we advertise this"-behavior - you're pulling the same NGO-like brainwash stunt that all of the fucking neoliberal think tanks do!!
Get yourself some topics that really affect everybody's lives instead of acting the Americanized wannabe-leftists that live on campus and think they've seen the world!
And - don't just promote, just fucking act! Who else should just make a change if not you humans themselves?! God? Aliens? The walking dead?!
You push the real work far away from you and pick something you can work yourself off to make yourself appear like you do something for anybody! And meanwhile, people are stupid enough to even believe you!!
You know what? You're already part of the establishment. And you're going to be judged by the people like the establisment, once they pluck up the courage.
If this becomes the case - don't cry about the far-right activists that maybe lead them... You decided you didn't need to listen.
matrixmann: (Waiting for command)
Do information campaigns really fulfill their purpose?
Isn't it more important what people do from day to day - what their mindset is that determines their acting everyday?
And do these campaigns have any influence at all on how people think about a certain matter, about a certain group of people?
Did any campaign, for example, ever change any peoples' thinking towards gays? Or make it clear to them "you know, that's like somebody glued tits on your chest, made you be able to get babies, put you in a woman's dress and told you 'from this day on, you live as Maria for all days'"?
Did anything ever convince anyone "this is a story that can happen next door to me, so I better be no asshole 'cause I still need to live in one and the same apartment building with my neighbors"?
matrixmann: (Black suits comin')
One just can't deny that it seems like political discussions more and more drift towards the niveau that is common in the US and that it more and more is about seeing races, sexes, sexual preferences and the discrimination of such.
Like - a white average person that identifies with its born gender is not entitled to critisize a dark-colored person or a person with roots from Turkey, even though it has its justification because the person itself behaves inappropriate and it has nothing to do with him being the phenotype that he is.
First that person is black (or orange or yellow or blue like a smurf), second he is human.
And because he is black, no white Central European person is entitled to say anything bad about him because first that would be discrimination. Just because of something nobody is to blame for, which you can't pick when you are created.
Especially that emerges currently in the refugee debate.
But if another issue is the topic, it is the same.
Suddenly there is dicrimination against women or against sexual minorities and the public gets worked up over another matter. Like there are no other problems to complain about or it always can be reduced to this. That's the ultimate reason why nothing works.
People complain about their own poverty because of discrimination, not because the system dropped them.
And, like a planned campaign against something, if wanting to get excited, they pick out only the worst examples for public debates which you can really certify xenophobia, sexism and discrimination against certain religions.
Acting through presenting, like this is the only kind of person critical of a thing that exists.
There is only black and white, nothing in between. You can recognize a sexist by the shape of his nose.
All mantras that progressivism ever preached about not generalizing, projecting an assumption onto a mass of people blanket, they disobey themselves massively if it suits their wishes. They don't see single persons, they also only see masses standing against them. Let alone if they find someone's statements inappropriate according to their mindset, then he's as outlawed for defamations and reputational damage as a serious felon...
matrixmann: (Thinking)
Die klassichen Arbeitsteilung von Mann und Frau der früheren Jahrhunderten sollte auch unter dem Aspekt der Arbeitsteilung betrachtet werden.
Ein Tag hat nur 24 Stunden; wenn einerseits Geld, andererseits aber auch Essen gekauft, zubereitet, häusliche Arbeiten wie Wäsche waschen, Putzen und sonstige Erhaltungsarbeiten als auch die Besorgung von Trinkwasser bewältigt werden müssen ohne Zuhilfenahme moderner Geräte wie Waschmaschinen, Herden und Autos, trinkbares Wasser ebenso nicht aus einer Leitung und einem Hahn, sondern aus einem Brunnen respektive durch eine Pumpe aus dem Erdreich geschöpft werden müssen, dann erreichen, allein durch das tägliche Zeitlimit bedingt, die Möglichkeiten eines Menschen die Grenzen des Machbaren für den Einzelnen.
Es müssen also mehrere Personen an der Bewältigung des Haushalts beteiligt sein und an seiner Aufrechterhaltung. Erst die Mittel der Moderne machen es möglich, dass jemand all dies allein bestreiten kann, und dass beide Partner einer Beziehung vollzeit arbeiten gehen können (noch dazu zu den gleichen Tageszeiten).
Es ermöglicht sogar, dass nicht die älteren Kinder (ab ca. 7 / 8 Jahren) einer Familie fester Bestandteil dieser Aufrechterhaltung der täglichen Lebensbasis mehr sein müssen und es lediglich noch eine Frage der Vorbereitung auf das Leben als Erwachsener in einem eigenen Haushalt sein kann.

Vielleicht eine gewagte These: Obgleich beide Geschlechter hätten jeweils den Part des anderen einnehmen können ohne dabei nach diskriminierenden Punkten vorgehen zu müssen, bildete sich diese Form der Arbeitsteilung heraus auf Grund der biologisch bedingten physischen Eigenschaften der beiden Geschlechter. Männer sind in der Muskelkraft stärker als Frauen, deswegen sind sie besser geeignet für physisch anstrengenden Arbeiten und den täglichen Broterwerb - der ohne die Zuhilfenahme moderner Maschinen, nur mit Hilfe von Handarbeit, größte Anforderungen an den menschlichen Körper stellt.
Frauen dagegen müssen zwar für die Hausarbeit ein stabiles Rückrat haben, welches für beide Geschlechter gleichermaßen wichtig ist, da auch sie Lasten transportieren und Muskelkraft aufwenden müssen, es ist dennoch leichter für sie zu bewältigen, Wäsche mit einem Waschbrett zu waschen als 30 Kilo schwere Gemüse- oder Getreidesäcke zu tragen. Oder Gemüse zu putzen, zu schneiden und einen Kesel Suppe aus ihnen zu kochen anstelle ein Feld manuell zu bearbeiten.
Wenn eine Frau keinen Mann hatte - weil keiner sie wollte oder ihr Mann bereits verstorben war und kein Sohn bereits reif genug war, die Rolle in der Arbeitsteilung zu übernehmen - konnte es ihr passieren, dass sie solche Tätigkeiten trotzdem ausführen musste aus dem Grunde, dass sie dazu gezwungen war, weil es niemand anderes für sie tat. Manche Exemplare - sowohl heute als auch in früheren Zeiten - waren dabei weniger, andere besser begabt und dafür geschaffen.
Für Männer galt dasselbe an dieser Stelle auf Grund des vorherrschenden Patriarchats einmal nicht, da sie sich wesentlich schneller wieder eine Frau nehmen konnten oder wenigstens ihre Töchter die Rolle der Mutter in der Arbeitsteilung übernehmen mussten, sobald sie groß genug dafür waren.

Für das Grundlegende kann aber gesagt werden: Ob es Diskriminierungsgründe gewesen sind oder nicht, sekundär, im Detail betrachtet, ergibt sich sogar aus dieser Form der Arbeitsteilung eine gewisse Logik, die einige Zweifel offen lässt, ob lediglich Diskriminierung an Hand des Geschlechts dazu geführt hat, dass Mann und Frau die Arbeiten zugeteilt bekommen haben, die sie erhielten.
Ohne die technischen Hilfsmittel der Moderne wäre es auch heute nicht möglich, anders zu leben als auf diese Art und Weise - die Arbeit zu teilen, Aufgaben zuzuweisen, je nach der persönlichen Begabung und den physischen Möglichkeiten des Einzelnen.
Arbeitsteilung ist sogar etwas, was in die Moderne überlebt hat - wenn auch nicht mehr ganz so ausladend wie es in früheren Jahrhunderten der Fall war.
An Stelle der freien Zeit, die durch die Arbeitserleichterung durch Maschinen entsteht, wachsen Hobbys, andere Verpflichtungen, soziale Verpflichtungen, längere Arbeitszeiten - generell oder aufgrund von freiwilligen Überstunden wegen des zusätzlichen Geldes -, Vergnügen, Unterhaltung und das Befassen mit dem Weltgeschene - sowohl in politischer als auch in sonstiger Hinsicht.
Es eröffnet auch den Raum dafür, sich schick zu kleiden, sich zu schminken, einen Duft aufzulegen, weil man durch weniger Schmutzquellen belastet ist, und balzen zu gehen, insofern man noch keinen Partner gefunden hat, oder gar den bestehenden - ganz übel - durch einen anderen auszutauschen.
matrixmann: (Ready)
Dies einmal aufgegriffen: https://allesevolution.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/was-hat-dich-zur-feindseligkeit-gegenueber-dem-feminismus-gebracht/

Was kann einen dazu bringen, ein Gegner des Feminismus zu werden?
Manche werden einen bei dieser Fragestellung allein schon mit großen Augen ansehen oder dafür auf den Scheiterhaufen stecken wollen, weil sie es für sie gleichbedeutend ist mit der Ansicht, dass Frauen wieder ihre häuslichen Rollen einnehmen sollen und hinter ihren Männern zurückstehen bleiben sollen.
Dem muss nicht so sein.
Man sollte an dieser Stelle, wie immer, genau denjenigen zuhören, die eine solche Äußerung von sich geben.
Gründe dafür können z. B. sein, dass grundlegende biologische Erkenntnisse im radikalen Feminismus verneint werden, insbesondere, was die hormonelle Situation angeht und inwiefern diese bei Menschen auch einen Schiefgang im persönlichen Empfinden bewirken können (das menschliche Gehirn ist der beste Anfang- und der beste Endpunkt, wenn es darum geht, Sterne sehen zu wollen); die Verneinung teilweise sämtlichen anthropologischen Grundwissens, was sich seit Nietzsche, Freud, Konrad Lorenz und anderen mit fortwährenden Justierungen aufgetürmt hat, die allgemeine Verneinung der immer noch instiktiven Funktionsweise des Menschen und auch das Sich-alles-hindrehen, damit es in die gewünschten Theorien passt, ohne Widersprüche zu erzeugen.
Um es auch anders auszudrücken: Die Art und Weise wie diskutiert wird, es wird auf einem Niveau wie das Immanuel Kants diskutiert, und dabei als gegebener Fakt angenommen, der Mensch könne über alle Funktionsweisen seines Körpers als auch seines Geistes durch bewusste Entscheidungen allein bestimmen - wenn dem aber so wäre, dann müsste sich jeder bereits daran erinnern, das Atmen nicht zu vergessen, oder damit zubringen, seinen Herzschlag zu koordinieren, weil dieser keinem unbewussten Vorgang unterläge.
Abgesehen davon, dass es anscheinend feste Bilder von Helden und von Feinden im Feminismus gibt, die mit militanten Mitteln verteidigt werden, ohne dass man jemanden dazu auffordern muss, es zu tun.

Der Feminismus hat bereits das Zenit überschritten, sich allein für die Gleichberechtigung von Mann und Frau zu engagieren (wenn dies überhaupt das Hauptziel zu Zeiten seiner Entstehung gewesen ist, und nicht doch der Zustand, der jetzt in der Bewegung hervortritt).
Mittlerweile ist es eine Ideologie von vielen, die Hass, gewisse Feindbilder und die Wünsche nach Überlegenheit bedient, wo eigentlich jemand einmal die gleiche Ebene angedacht hat. Mehr noch, sie verbreitet wissenschaftlichen Unsinn, nimmt aber Einfluss auf gesellschaftliche Abläufe und die Erziehung von Heranwachsenden.
Ein Vergleich: Wenn eine andere Ideologie etwa gleichwertiges tat, so wird sie heute als "faschistisch" bezeichnet oder mindestens als "totalitär" verdammt. Inbesondere, wenn sie es erreichte, für gewisse gesellschaftlichen Schichten einseitige Vorteile in der Gesellschaft herauszuschlagen und ein bestimmtes Maß an Straffreiheit für bestimmte Situationen zu erwirken.

Der Feminismus und ähnliche Ideologien sollten der Tatsache ins Gesicht sehen, dass kein Mensch pauschal besser ist als der andere, nur weil er mit bestimmten Körperteilen geboren wurde, die er sich nicht aussuchen oder reservieren lassen kann.
Eine Forsetzung dieser Logik ist eine Kontinuität dessen, welche sich die Menschheit spätestens seit der Entmachtung der Adeligen und des Klerus zu entledigen versucht.

Wer Gleichberechtigung sucht, darf nicht anfangen, eine Seite des Geschehens wieder zu bevorzugen.
Derjenige muss es auch als eine der Möglichkeiten ansehen, dass man selbst, als Profiteur von der Gleichberechtigung, bei einer Entscheidung auch derjenige sein kann, der das Nachsehen hat.
Alles andere ist eine Forsetzung dessen, was man bereits zuvor kennt, nur von einer anderen Seite der Medaille ausgeübt.
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
...tile roofs and work at heights.

...work in construction areas.

...work underground.

...fight in war and see and commit traumatic deeds.

...have always been faced with the judgment to earn and care financially for a family.

...have always been measured by their ability to win out over a competitor.

...often are the ones who pay the aliments for the kids.

...often enough are still solely responsible that technical stuff runs.

...receive less support from social organizations than women (except from anti-drug programs).

...are more likely to be sent to solve life-threatening tasks.

...make out most of the special police and military forces.

...also don't always want to do it with someone.

...can also be subject to sexual harassment.

...can also be subject to sexual exploitation.

...are denied to have female character attributes without claiming they're gay or transsexuals.

...are more often subjects to be spoiled by their mums than women by their fathers.

...get urged to treat ladies well even if they behave hurtful against them.

...may suffer hair loss when they reach their twenties.

...grieve if their dads are not present in their lives.

...are the biggest assholes in the world and also simultaneously the most marginalized group in their woes.
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
Have the ideals for leadership of heterosexual relationships that are based upon long-lasting tradition of religious belief transferred onto homosexual relationships as they became more socially acceptable?
At least you can't deny the focus upon it being a 2-person relationship and faithfulness and no adultery has increased since it became a topic in public dialogue.
Practicing polyamory or a policy of "to each his own needs" gets a similar strange look as among man-woman spheres, as long as someone is not involved further into subcultural scenes which are open to these kind of lifestyles.
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
Does constantly being surrounded by talk about sex shape the mind towards thinking about it all the time?
The question arises at least since the decade since when it moved in into the daily boulevard and pure entertainment shows.
Everywhere you're surrounded at least by a pair of breasts - uncovering they're not supposed to do as it should be content appropriate for a child-friendly time, but for a proper dressing it would be said too much - or they unpack the joker of allround naked skin with the nessecary private parts covered so that nobody can call it "pornography".
And if not that, these parts of the media depicture all kinds of beauty contests that stupidity, crudity and normality have to offer.
Another thing if they don't do that, but they just downright talk about it.
The serious job takes advertising: Is there ever a perfume commercial without appealing to the most primitive instincts of humans?
Cosmetics destined for men also barely get along without the attract-a-lady card.

Before the sexual revolution came, people were ashamed to talk about this topic, even if they were troubled, it wasn't integrated into society as it is today - but what kind of development took it after it was?
Is there, frankly, a necessity to watch pornography to be sexualized? To think in these terms?
Taking a look at how much mass media surround you with that topic, how advertising keeps appealing to you on billboards with asses, chests and bodies, and how entertainment is diluted with messages on that level - look at how much music already is about undressing oneself and showing oneself in ridiculously revealing dresses, rather than the songs themselves -, it is more a miracle passing this topic without understanding or noticing.
In the 90s, as the hardest decade in all this, it was lived quite obvious, even in the pornographical character, sometimes it even appeared quite obviously in music. Compared to that, things have already gone square again.
But what made it out in difference was if you stayed away from pop music, if you ignored the rise of Techno and you put your distance between media contents that propagated sex, you could still find some corners that didn't deal with it where you could settle yourself down.
These days this isn't possible anymore.
Enterprises want to sell so that urge floods every movie and lets them become an unobvious advertsing for various brands. Each thing that reaches mass media is like a fashion show, obsessed with how people look like, how they should pack themselves to cause attraction, or at least how to encase themselves to feel well on their own.
Coming to the movies - do actually still a few be made suited for adults which don't contain a sex scene in some way?
Many conventional love stories do exist as well.
Especially those which come from overseas - which try to rattle at the door of the conventions of those peoples' culture superficially, but remain ineffective and that's what they wanted from the start.

One can form his own opinion if being surrounded by such media and cultural contents while people tend to spend a lot of time with it instead of maybe going out alters their thinking by the time passing.
What already lies beyond is the path that mankind has previously traveled - and one can regard it as a proof of what it effects.
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
Enhancement to this: https://matrixmann.dreamwidth.org/73173.html

Not to forget that TV guides are always decorated with a woman on their front page and barely with a man.

Sorted

13 August 2015 11:59 am
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
If someone wants to find sexism cast in stone, he should take a look at the magazine rack. What do you find attributed for women? Nobles, gossip, celebreties, beauty, lifestyle, cooking, family and garden.
For the guys it doesn't look better. Computer, technology, car, politics, finances, lifestyle, hobby magazines and men advice gather in the corner that is, perhaps outside of a few obvious exceptions, assumedly attributed to men.
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
What does it use to be lead by a woman if she believes in the regime as well?
matrixmann: (Wasteland Ranger)
What kind of role models do young males have these days?
Okay, you can go with your father, you can go with your brother, you can go with any other male relative you're close to or that exists in your regular surroundings.
But what if none of that exists?
What, if none of that is good for anything, do you have to offer as a replacement?
For the youngsters, you may have a little yellow sponge, but be that TV show as stupid as it is. Aside from that, you barely have some catchy figures that reflect a character which gets stuck in your head.
For the elders, media offers a few superheroes, depending on where you live, and some wannabe figures and epilepsy causing action figures whose profile as a person is very flat or not acurately reflected due to them being actually suited for a more adult audience.
The almost matured do already have the musicians left, and some more or less flatened video game figures which do nothing more than shooting abstract figures and some humans.
The musicians partly can be used as a role model- strongly depending on who it is.
The wider the age turns up, the lesser you find some.
The last instance are some old-aged action heroes from the last century.
Apart from the numeral appearance, does that carry some variety?
If you look what had been done on the side for females, it is downright a shame.
Females can be the clever one, females can be the heroines, they can kick somebody's ass, they can kill people, they can be sensitive, they can be a mother, they can be a boss, they can earn money at all, or they can just be the princess in the pink fairy tale land.
In some rare occasions they're even allowed to be the antagonist.
What media offers as a role model for males simply can be reduced to the sharp shooter on his never-ending quest to destroy everything, being downright stupid all the time or playing the kong trying to impress the ladies and defending his territory.
Aside from that, the only thing you get offered otherwise is the softie that nobody likes. - Or, to be exact, that the females like, but his own members of the same sex detest because his touchy-feely kind gets him more female companion.
The media also continues to enhance those types.
Compared to the change that had been done to role models for females and the change still being done, it is an evidence of incapacity.
Especially because female role models become a topic over and over again, but male ones get completely locked out.
Like "males know how males behave from the moment they're born".
In regard to the fact that lesser and lesser boys grow up without their fathers (Gayropa ≠ gay: "If you ask why there are no men in the West or wannabe strongs, then ask why their dads were so proud of them that they needed to disappear"), more surrounded by female educational personnel and women in care positions, and lack of reasonable male figures in their close environment this issue becomes a serious problem.
Males become torn between trying to fulfill what society demands of them and their imagination of themselves.
They're missing a guideline how to please everyone else's needs while still maintaining their identity and their identity as a male.
Instead they get filled with clichés.
And the female educational and care personnel can't make up for that because women don't behave, women don't think and, above all, women don't feel like males.

September 2017

M T W T F S S
     1 2 3
45 6789 10
11 1213 141516 17
1819 202122 2324
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Statistics


Free counters!

Free counters!
Page generated 26 September 2017 02:31 pm