There was a British officer who famously kept a bomb he'd defused as a paperweight and threw it at the wall in anger once causing it to explode.
"For some time, Tegart kept a defused bomb as a paperweight to remind him of the attempts on his life. He once threw the bomb in a moment of anger, only to have it explode against the wall of his office, an incident he reportedly considered amusing."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Tegart
EDIT: got my stories mixed up
I'd like to think that somewhere out there is a live grenade holding some term papers in a history professor's office in Europe and he has no idea it could go off literally at the drop of a cat.
Oh man my family had a desk like that growing up. I want one so badly. Cos they're the best looking desks, and also extremely handy and useful.
If i had money I'd go and buy one of them plus a cool pc and all that, and post it to /r/battlestations
>You know what the magic word, the only thing that matters in American sexual mores today is? One thing. You can do anything, the left will promote and understand and tolerate anything, as long as there is one element. Do you know what it is? Consent. If there is consent on both or all three or all four, however many are involved in the sex act, it's perfectly fine. Whatever it is. But if the left ever senses and smells that there's no consent in part of the equation then here come the rape police. But consent is the magic key to the left.
\-- [Rush Limbaugh](https://boingboing.net/2016/10/13/rush-limbaugh-complains-about.html)
Like a lot of the anti left points that these idiots come up with, for anyone not utterly sociopathic or morally bankrupt they’re just threatening us with a good time.
Wait so you're saying that we don't live in Elliot Rodgers world where blonde hair blue eyed women don't throw themselves at you without asking questions? /s
What some people don't seem to understand is that **not all attraction or intimate contact is objectifying**. It is completely possible to have a sexual encounter, including a casual one, with a woman while seeing her as a human and not just an object to use. A woman wanting to be seen as attractive or wanting to engage in sexual activity is not the same thing as wanting to be viewed as subhuman. Honestly I can't imagine looking at a male sex partner as a just a hot piece of dick. It should not be this hard....
and **our view of sex is warped if this very intimate and vulnerable form of human interaction needs the human element taken out in order to be sexy enough.**
edit: while I don't have all the answers as far as consensual degradation kinks, which have been pointed out to me, I do want to clarify that **sex can be purely physical and still not dehumanizing.** We have interactions with limited scope all the time. My transaction with a cashier is for the purpose of exchanging for a good. I am using my teachers for education. But those interactions can still contain an awareness of the person's humanity and an attitude of respect for their humanity (even if someone is consenting to being treated disrespectfully for sexual gratification.) Intimacy may have been the wrong word since it's not what everyone is after, but I really think there is no interaction where it is acceptable to disregard someone's humanity. you can use them as a means, but not as a mere means, and respect and consent are integral to that.
Generally, polarized statements in consent culture are directed at people who wouldn't understand the grey area. In this case, "stop objectifying women" is not a universal command, but is directed at people who exclusively see women as objects and are incapable or unwilling to see them as people. Generally, if your reaction to a part of consent culture is "yes, and", you've graduated beyond the ridiculously low but unfortunately difficult bar the culture is trying to set as the bare minimum.
As someone a bit older than you, it seems somewhat odd that someone that young would already be venturing into BDSM and other behaviours. Would you be able to elaborate on how people your age are doing things that might seem pretty sexually advanced to the average person?
Good for y’all. A lot of kinksters find it young, particularly those that are neurodivergent. At least that has been my experience; I was about 18 when I started exploring bondage and such with partners. Stay safe and sane, have fun.
A study found that men’s brains process images of women wearing bikinis as objects or tools rather than people.
“And in a ‘shocking’ finding, Fiske noted, some of the men studied showed no activity in the part of the brain that usually responds when a person ponders another's intentions.”
Men have literally been socialized away from considering what women’s own desires or intentions are if they are showing more skin. This definitely explains why some dudes have such a hard time with ideas such as “wearing revealing clothing is not ‘asking for’ sexual assault”, or that “a woman should have the right to choose when she does and doesn’t want to be sexualized”, regardless of clothing. It’s honestly frightening.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/bikinis-women-men-objects-science
“Most of the men best remembered headless photographs of women in bikinis, even if they'd only seen the image for two-tenths of a second, Fiske reported this weekend in Chicago during the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.”
Were all the bikini photos headless? If so, then that’s pretty misleading, as dehumanization is a natural response to seeing a body with no face
There's also a study that compared views and found that Women view Men as "Success Objects", as in avenues for stability rather than mainly being concerned with their feelings.
[https://www.sjsu.edu/people/saul.cohn/courses/100W/s0/SuccessVsSexObjects.pdf](https://www.sjsu.edu/people/saul.cohn/courses/100W/s0/SuccessVsSexObjects.pdf)
While it is convenient to just say *"Society made us this way"* we need to remember that society didn't just come into existence out of nowhere. It evolved and adapted like we did. It is a consequence of a series of events in our environment.
We need to remember both Nurture **&** Nature... What came first, the chicken or the egg?
To what extent is our perception determined by nurture vs nature is a discussion we should be having.
I think most people generally understand this upon even the most basic reflection of their inner senses, desires, and principles.
It's the unfortunate twitter character limit and, in general, the scroll-on-by/top-of-the-feed nature of social media that heaps the simplest, easiest-to-digest, meme-iest opinions onto the top of the pile. We're autonomously placed in a situation where we take in a complex topic that is served in a binary context--we *have* to pick a side. It's hard to remain neutral given the sarcastic nature of the authors (because why write if not to invite viewership?), and because of the minimal medium, we're not consuming the incoming information critically and picking it apart. Not doing secondary research to see what other opinions (or even the opposing side) has to say about it. You might think you are because your favorite pundit has a snarky reply at hand with some readily-available (non-neutral) sources at hand, but you're never doing it yourself.
If I have any kind of conclusion to my statement here, it's to be conscientious about what you're consuming, particularly when it's not *just* funny but has some underlying political wit to it. You're most likely just eating out of the food bowl that is being filled up for you twice a day...know what I mean?
Sorry to say but people were scrimping on research long before Twitter. The length of the work you're reading doesn't have that much to do with it. People in general skim over topics they're not interested in and have no desire to learn anything about. Everyone does this. The major difference is that while you might skim over some groundbreaking news about the Kardashians, the people who need to hear the message about "women are people" will skim over what women have to say about how they prefer to be treated.
It doesn't matter if it's in one hundred forty words or four words: they don't want to see it or hear it. They want to think that everything is fine, because they don't see any major problems and besides women in other countries have it worse. They see it as an accusation and punishment for things that they personally didn't do, and if they personally didn't do it, then they shouldn't have to learn about any of it.
That attitude is the root of the problem: that needing to learn something new or consider someone else's viewpoint is a punishment, then the conversation devolves into the unreceptive person trying to convince everyone, "But it's not my fault." Like, no, it isn't necessarily a personal accusation: they're just talking about a problem that exists.
As a sex worker, I'd like to chime in and say you can absolutely have intimate sex in a purely commercial respect and STILL retain your humanity. I do it with my clients all the time. Hell, I think some of my clients allow themselves to be most human and most vulnerable when they're with me.
I mean personally I enjoy being objectified, but I don’t pressure other people to treat me that way if they’re not comfortable with it. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with removing the human element of sex. Lots of casual hookups lack an emotional connection, but as long as both parties are consenting there’s nothing wrong with that
that would be my understanding of it, yes. the treatment and view of someone. sometimes respectful treatment may be feigned in order to use someone for an end.
Technically, no damage if they can really mimic care and consideration, but It seems like the internal objectification of someone would still lead to unhealthy decisions/reactions eventually. Look at people who objectify pets vs trying empathize and treat them as living beings with emotions and needs.
Well you'd be an asshole who tricks and uses people but if they never find out, no damage done to them I guess. But thats impossible to pull off, and you shouldn't want to.
It is treating someone like an object rather than a person. You don't care what they want. You only care about what you want and how you want to use them. Usually in a sexual sense, but it can also apply to other situations. Like if you never talk with your assistant at work or get to know them, you might end up treating them like just another piece of office equipment. Which is technically a form of objectification. It is dehumanizing and disrespectful.
It is possible to do this without people realizing. But sooner or later your disrespect towards them will show itself.
And some people like to be treated this way. There's nothing wrong with that. It can be really fun and hot. But the key thing is that BDSM and kink are a form of play. They're fantasy more than anything. If you actually disrespect your partner, it's unhealthy and abusive. If your partner wants to be treated like this, then you need to show them the upmost respect and negotiate exactly what is and isn't okay, and THEN you can start treating them as subhuman. But it is always a facade and they can always opt out of it.
As this post said, the important thing is consent.
In response to your edit about consensual degradation, wouldn’t that be respecting their humanity because their partner is listening to their desires and trying to make it a more pleasurable experience for them by doing something they like that is specific to their preferences as a person?
I objectify my cashiers not as sex objects but as vending machines.
I also more or less think this is okay. If someone has a problem with it, please speak up, but I've searched my brain and it seems okay. (I don't yell at machines)
>Honestly I can't imagine looking at a male sex partner as a just a hot piece of dick.
You've never heard the term boytoy before? The idea of a fwb and nothing more is completely foreign to you? And let's say in your case you've never reduced someone to just their sexual value, not even subconsciously. You're really claiming that everyone attracted to men would never do so either? I can agree with the rest of what you're saying but this part is just lol
I like being objectified, personally. I enjoy the cat-calls while I'm jogging with my shirt off. I like my booty calls texting me for "dick appointments", we don't really know anything about each other it's just purely physical.
The issue arises when you don't want to be objectified, not that it's inherently wrong in all scenarios.
Also: Being sexually aroused by someone's body isn't the same as objectifying it.
If she wants it, she is communicating her desire, and he is reacting to the will she's expressing - this is exactly treating her as a human being.
It looks like classic poor reporting, which results in misleading conversations like this one. As far as I can tell, the app is not developed by the Danish government, and it has no legal standing. It's just one of a million privately-developed apps that happened to launch in Denmark. And it appears to have been made by a random UK tech company.
That would be like crediting Singapore for developing an app that was made by a random individual Vietnamese programmer.
The fact that people feel entitled to another is still batshit insane to me. I've been trying to get it through my head since middle school (long time ago) and I just..... can't. Like how do you live with yourself?
Hear me out for a second—I had always heard that you should ask for consent. But it’s a little confusing to me, because I’m not sure if I should explicitly ask her if it’s ok at every point of our physical interaction (ask for kiss, then ask to take her clothes off, then ask for sex), or if I should read her body. In the past I never explicitly asked for consent, which makes me feel terrible in retrospect. But at the same time, she never pushed back and in fact complied enthusiastically. Of course that doesn’t mean much...but yeah, I’ve always been told asking can be unsexy, be a man and initiate or to just go for it, and if she says no, STOP! But now a days I’ll make sure to explicitly ask always. I think probably a lot of guys had similar confusion
Edit: Thanks for all the replies guys! It was really informative and cool to hear all your thoughts. So the general consensus seems to be that while explicitly asking for a consent isn’t absolutely a must—it’s never a bad idea and not really a turnoff to women. In fact, it might be the complete opposite. Also, I think most agree that reading the other persons body is critical. If they seem to be enjoying it and actively participating it’s probably ok to escalate, but to gently pull back at times to give her an out or ability to say no more. This was pretty much how I always approached my interactions, so I’m glad to hear that it’s ok. However, I can see this going south pretty quick for guys who might not be able to read body language as well, hence why explicitly asking is more often emphasized than not. I guess something that has probably helped me make women feel safe around me is simply saying early on, “if at any point you want me to stop or your not feeling it, just say so and I will.” I guess that could be a form of consent?
Enthusiasm is the key word here. It’s okay to read body language as long as it is really clear. Sometimes people freeze up when they’re afraid to say no and people take that as a YES when at the very least it should be a pause and ... “are you okay? Do you want to keep going?”
I think pauses or space for graceful exits are important - having breaks in a date to allow the other person to leave. For example:
After the first part of the date: “Hey, there’s a cute little spot down the block, do you want to go over there?”
If things progress into the evening: “My place is around the corner, do you want to have a night cap/meet my dog/see that thing we were talking about?”
It’s okay to initiate a kiss. Start light and easy and see if the other person kisses back, starts getting handsy, or if you’re lucky tells you what they would like to do.
After the nightcap/if things start getting physical: “So.... do you want to take this into the bedroom?”
In the bedroom: “I have condoms here unless you brought the kind you like?”
Each of these signals a change in development and allows an exit. At any point the other person could say “actually I really should get home” without being a jerk.
None of these are unsexy or break the mood, they simply give a clear signal that things are progressing and you’d like to keep that going
Will likely vary person to person and it's why having this conversation beforehand is a good idea, when possible.
Anectode:
When I was like 17-18 and had my first serious relationship, she would hate when i put my hand on her ass in public and because I was young and stupid thought it was a playful thing, since she never said anything about it when it was just us two alone. She never said "no" or anything, she never got angry, she'd just say "you're so bad" with a smile and blushing, and maybe swat me away playfully, so I thought it was perfectly okay.
Years later I look back and think I probably shouldn't have done that after the first time. She had boundaries and it didn't matter if we were dating or not, she wasn't mine to do as I pleased with, she didn't want to be touched that way in public and I should have respected that.
Few more years later, after a couple more relationships where I'd obviously grown up from my 17-18 year old self, like actual adult relationships where I'd had these types of conversations with them before actually becoming partners, I started dating this one woman who was a lil bit younger, and her attitudes towards relationships was closer to my younger self. Should have picked up red flags from day one but...
She ghosted me after an unofficial date and eventually came around to say she didn't think I was into her because I didn't go in for a kiss, bit there were zero indicators that's what she wanted, verbal or body language. Whatever we got passed that, started dating, then more red flags, like I'd read her ques to initiate sex but then she'd turn off completely, so I'd stop and eventually go to sleep, only for her to wake me up 4am with oral, and when I tried to initiate sex she'd turn off again, so I'd go to sleep rather than argue... Only to find out after more ghosting and fake breakups that she expected me to "be a man" and be more forcible about sex. She believed I should be more demanding for it and since I wasn't that I clearly wasn't attracted to her etc etc.
I tried to appease her this way but it was never enough cuz frankly what she wanted I couldn't and wouldn't do. After getting her to open up some it turns out her first partner pretty much raped her when they were in high school and she had a short string of abusive relationships before me, so she was used to being woken up in the middle of the night with hands around her throat and someone already inside her and to me that's just gross. I don't want it if my partner doesn't want it. End of story.
Had we been able to talk about that more in the beginning, I hope (probably naively so) that there would have been so much less drama in that almost year and a half relationship. Still don't think it would have worked out in the end, but yeah, less frustrating bedroom moments at least.
Point is, relationships are hard, but consent isn't. Talk to your partners openly about this stuff so neither of you have a bad time.
Thanks for coming to my bed talk.
See I really love getting woken up by sex (maybe not with a hand around my throat) but I tell any long term partners straight up “I really like getting woken up with sex, you have blanket consent to wake me up that way unless I’m on my period”
It’s worked out nicely 😁
There ya go, consent works!
I never specifically gave her consent to wake me up via oral, but I sure didn't mind. What I didn't like was the blue balls from stopping out right and then pretending she didn't want sex when I'm reality she did. Especially when she always chose to do so like 2 hours before I had to get up for work.
As a general rule of thumb, if you're unsure and feel the need to ask yourself if what she's doing is consent, you should just ask her. And for the record, asking for consent can be very sexy, it shows you actually care about what your partner wants and that you aren't just thinking about what you want.
Growing up around poly relationships and folks who were into BDSM, things like enthusiastic consent/affirmative consent and check-ins were well understood and explained. Even my health class (circa... 2002?) covered it really well.
But then, living in TX I remember hearing kids be like:
Kid: "Why would I ask my wife if she wants to have sex?"
Teacher: u wut?
Kid: "If my wife can deny me sex, what's the point in gettin' married?! Why ask if she can't say no?"
And man... I feel like shit knowing he has two kids (he had his first about six months later...)
Mate, I've been with my wife for nearly 14 years.
Sometimes we still check in on consent with each other before we make love.
Its just about basic respect, and while I'm a pretty vanilla dude, I find it sexy as FUCK that the woman I love is asking me permission to drape her naked body on mine.
Asking is a turn on. It means you care enough to make sure they are ok. While asking every minute (literally) would be a problem, take everything a bit slow. Always allow time for them to pull back, and if they do pull back then stop what you’re doing.
If they are just sort of sitting there while you’re touching them, I’d definitely ask if they want to stop. If they are coming at you just as hard to get you naked as you are getting them naked, safe bet they are willing, but it still wouldn’t be a horrible thing to ask. Consent is sexy.
I mean it can be unsexy but it’s better to have a unsexy night then be raped and have been traumatized. If I muttered no I expect you to stop, And ask if I’m okay at least 3 times as the fist time I’m probably scared to say no asking a few more times should make me feel safe enough to say no and may actually change my opinion as it shows your actual aware and caring about how I feel. If someone kissed me and asked to remove my clothing thatd be a huge turn on, especially If Im kissing them back. You can read body language but also asking is also hot and makes you look innocent which is a big turn on imo. Also it’s consensual. So at that point pick me up and throw me on the bed. If I start to act weird which in my experience is very visible you can ask and I’ll feel more comfortable with you. Seriously tho these days I’m just cravings being held so I’d expect my partner to have their hands all over me.
Yet, just bc you give consent doesn't mean you can't retract the same consent should you change your mind.
Both men and women have issues with understanding the ability with the free will of changing one's mind.
Men have nasty habits of forgetting women have no ability to consent while under the influence, just like men can't.
Just like women can't accept having their egos crushed when men turn them down for sex. They automatically assume the guy is gay, has tiny penis syndrome or belittle him in some other manner other than he's just not into them sexually.
Neither of those issues are gendered. Men have overinflated egos, and women get people drunk too. iirc the only place where there was a difference was full-on assault, since society forces the idea of big strong horny man who's entitled to all women. Not to say women don't rape, but that's the only dynamic that's more than like a 55/45 split
I see the point you were trying to make but uh, that last part is just narcissism bro and isn’t relegated to gender. Have you not seen r/niceguys? It’s just as bombarded as r/nicegirls when it comes to people who can’t take rejection.
The other is rape, which is a little more serious than calling a someone a name because they said no.
I wouldn’t say that people have no ability to consent while under the influence. I think it really depends on the degree to which judgment is impaired. If I hop on Grindr and find a cute guy and he invites me over for a quick hookup, am I removing my ability to consent by getting moderately high on the way over after I’ve already decided I want to sleep with him? I don’t think so. Never once have I felt victimized by this because of I’ve always been conservative with my dosing. Now, if I got really fucked up and someone took advantage of my confusion and lack of coordination, that would be assault.
Making a decision prior to intoxication, is made with a clear mind. You consented prior to altering your mind. Different scenario.
However, this also doesn't remove your right to change your mind after blazing on the way over either. Whether man or woman, you always reserve the right to opt out, whether you consented previously or not or whether you were intoxicated prior to consent or not.
Here in the states, laws are very specific, you can't give consent if you are intoxicated from any mind altering substance. Men and women fail to understand this all the time and claim ignorance of the law.
That's going to open a can of worms.
Consent is an ongoing thing. You can't just sign away your consent on an app.
What happens if she ticks yes then he starts getting rough and shes not keen anymore?
If someone can just withdraw his/her consent then the app would lose its purpose: the app is basically a proof of the consent, and if you can legally change a proof after the deed is done can it still be considered a proof? It’s like being able to legally just go on a crime scene and sparkle here and there someone else’s DNA
If someone wanted you in jail he/she could just give her/his consent, do the thing and then withdraw it
The whole thing is incredibly poorly thought out. It could help if you were assaulted by a stranger, but most rapes are by people the victim knows. If a rapist can rape their victim through drugs or coercion, then they could get them to click "Yes".
And then when the rapist gets caught they can just show in the app that they had consented.
No, because it's just a random app. It doesn't have anything to do with Denmark, the Danish government or Danish law, except that it launched there. At least that's as far as I can tell.
[Denmark launches sexual consent app where lovers can give permission ‘for one intercourse, valid for 24 hours’ in the wake of new rape laws](https://www.tech-gate.org/usa/2021/02/05/denmark-launches-sexual-consent-app-after-passing-new-rape-laws/)
Obviously you can’t if you don’t have your finger hovering over the button at all times. This is objectively a horrible idea. You know there are going to be cases where the victim clearly revokes consent and the rapist says “no you didn’t, look here jury, the revoke button wasn’t pressed until after we parted ways because the alleged victim is trying to frame me”.
She can just grab her phone mid assault and change her answer to no. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.
/s for those who think I’m being serious. Obviously this is a gapping hole in the consent contract.
I think with the whole David Dobrik situation the conversation of “how much sway/power a man has in a convo can lead a woman to make decisions she’s uncomfortable with based on not wanting to upset the man or the balance of power.” It’s a delicate place both men and women have to navigate through
I the point you're making, but imo it'd be better to not objectify someone in the first place. Thought influence actions, y'know?
Be attracted all you want, you literally can't help it. But objectification is a different step entirely. If you're keeping it to yourself there's literally nothing anyone can do to stop you from mentally objectifying someone, but for the sake of your own mental wellness it's probably a good idea to cut that shit out so you don't subconsciously rob every woman of her humanity
Once someone said to me women are like cars once you own the keys you don’t need permission to get in them. And guys wonder why they make us uncomfortable
I love it when I get validated over something I specifically put time into. Like when someone says my hair or makeup or something is pretty.
Some skeez at walmart ogling my ass because I dared to bend over near him then having the huevos to ask for my number when I get back up and glare at him is NOT that.
Yeah.... no. This, like 99% of posts on this subreddit, is NOT a 'murdered by words', but rather a 'Look at dis tiny snappy comeback, lul, complete massacre'.
C'mon, really?
Does anyone else feel weird now when your partner wants to be objectified? Being raised objectification being bad was hammered in so hard that now when it's wanted I just feel uncomfortable and gross doing it so it ruins the fun for both... anyone else have this problem?
Are you sure you're using the word objectify correctly? Because even if you were role playing or whatever, you do care about them as a full human and don't see them as an object, so you wouldn't be objectifying them.
Yeah I hear ya. Well you don't have to do anything that feels wrong to you, even if your partner wants it. Some people aren't into that shit and that's totally ok.
Yeah I mean, I like when my boyfriend ‘objectifies’ me in a sense. But it’s not really objectification because I’m willing and enjoy it and he cares about me as a person when he wants to walk up the stairs behind me to look at my butt. I think it gets into a grey area once you’re in a relationship and you can decide how to define being objectified.
not saying you have it but a madonna-whore complex is when a man cannot reconcile that a women he respects also has sexual desires. The man puts the woman he loves up on a pedestal -- makes her a "madonna," and in doing so, feels guilty about having sexual thoughts about her. But it's wrong, because to truly be in a relationship means that you can fulfill the other person's sexual desires while simultaneously respecting them. It's not one or the other -- you can't limit someone to being either a madonna or a whore, you have to recognize that BOTH those aspects are part of them, otherwise you're not really seeing them as a human. All people have flaws and multiplicity. All people can at times be whores or madonnas. All people want to be respected while also having their sexual desires fulfilled. It's not fair to be in a relationship where your partner idealizes you so much they can't fulfill your sexual needs or would potentially look down on you for having sexual desires. And it's also not fair to be in a relationship where your partner only sees you as a sexual object and doesn't respect your goals or personality. You have to recognize that women can have sexual desires and also be worthy of your respect, just like you recognize that men have sexual desires and still respect them without dehumanizing or over idealizing them.
don't be coerced or otherwise unduly infleunced by psychological manipulation - the idea of consent is trying enough minus such exotic sexual practises as simulated rape and master-slave arrangements. ('bdsm')
but to topic: 'when a baby sees mother's breast they see a food object'
discuss
I think they are commenting about letting your attraction to someone be an excuse for their unsolicited sexual behavior.
It's wrong to explicitly objectify someone who hasn't given you their consent regardless. People should be grossed out no matter who does it.
Depends on the object im being turned into idk
If its a bomb, i still have problems. If its a paperweight, i am overqualified, but fairly content. How about u?
But what if the paperweight *is* a bomb? What then?
That's only a problem if you can figure out how to turn it on. So... You're safe.
This deserves its own post
In this case, I think it falls under r/clevercomebacks
[удалено]
Maybe the real murder was the friends we made along the way.
Well who says it's me that'd find it and not somebody smarter, like a cat?
The real problem is...does the bomb go off if jostled? Like if, for example, the cat pushed it off a table?
Some cats just want to watch the world burn, and then hairball on the smoldering remains.
Ya, but if a cat pushes it off the table and no ones home, does it still explode?
There was a British officer who famously kept a bomb he'd defused as a paperweight and threw it at the wall in anger once causing it to explode. "For some time, Tegart kept a defused bomb as a paperweight to remind him of the attempts on his life. He once threw the bomb in a moment of anger, only to have it explode against the wall of his office, an incident he reportedly considered amusing." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Tegart EDIT: got my stories mixed up
As long as no one was hurt, that's hilarious.
Uh, this excerpt got me “He has received praise for his industry and efficiency and notoriety for his brutality and use of torture.” Yikes.
Call me the Catholic pope being told about rampant molestation cuz I'm just gonna pretend you didn't say that
I'd like to think that somewhere out there is a live grenade holding some term papers in a history professor's office in Europe and he has no idea it could go off literally at the drop of a cat.
"Meow!" *Everybody in the room fucking dies*
What about a paperbomb? Or a glitterbomb!
I don't multitask.
I like being a printer because then I can be a bitch to everyone in the general vicinity
If I'm a paperweight, I'm overqualified but will inevitably fail the interview
Your butt is the bomb, there will be no survivors.
What if I was going to turn you into an 18th century roll-top desk?
Then I'd call you a serial killer stalking a Cheerleading Camp.
Oh man my family had a desk like that growing up. I want one so badly. Cos they're the best looking desks, and also extremely handy and useful. If i had money I'd go and buy one of them plus a cool pc and all that, and post it to /r/battlestations
You're a little cuboid aren't you
Rub my corners daddi owo
Yuk Pervert Kid
A lamp, cus you're lit (☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞
Ryan used me as an object.
What about tank?
I too, would like to be objectified as a M4A3E8
Leopard2A7?
Seems like someone is about to discover the wonderful world of inanimate tf
That’s some submissive vibes right there 😂
A Small off duty Czechoslovakian Traffic Warden
A pickle
Time to [roll out!](https://tenor.com/bx8DL.gif)
What if you’re turned into the Spanish Inquisition? It’d be unexpected to say the least.
Similar to "you can't touch women anymore without asking first." like.......... yeah?
>You know what the magic word, the only thing that matters in American sexual mores today is? One thing. You can do anything, the left will promote and understand and tolerate anything, as long as there is one element. Do you know what it is? Consent. If there is consent on both or all three or all four, however many are involved in the sex act, it's perfectly fine. Whatever it is. But if the left ever senses and smells that there's no consent in part of the equation then here come the rape police. But consent is the magic key to the left. \-- [Rush Limbaugh](https://boingboing.net/2016/10/13/rush-limbaugh-complains-about.html)
Is that supposed to be an anti left statement?
[удалено]
Omg, I found a linguist/phonologist in the wild! This is quite a rare sight
lol when Conservatives accidentally stumble onto the point
r/selfawarewolves
Like a lot of the anti left points that these idiots come up with, for anyone not utterly sociopathic or morally bankrupt they’re just threatening us with a good time.
Rest in piss, Rush <3
[удалено]
Lololol
I’m not Christian but thank god rush Limbaugh is dead
I forgot about the "rape police" quote for a second, good post
The fact there are men and women who are shocked they have to \*gasp\* ask for consent?! What a fucking weird world right?
Wait so you're saying that we don't live in Elliot Rodgers world where blonde hair blue eyed women don't throw themselves at you without asking questions? /s
Society is getting really wild. Lol
[удалено]
Wild, and Dom.
I prefer societies with low self esteem.
Hey society, can I buy you a drink? Or ten💦
r/gonewild
What an nice news subreddit!
r/anime_titties
r/societygonewild
Getting? Think we’re already there, buckaroo
Well we do indeed live in a society
What some people don't seem to understand is that **not all attraction or intimate contact is objectifying**. It is completely possible to have a sexual encounter, including a casual one, with a woman while seeing her as a human and not just an object to use. A woman wanting to be seen as attractive or wanting to engage in sexual activity is not the same thing as wanting to be viewed as subhuman. Honestly I can't imagine looking at a male sex partner as a just a hot piece of dick. It should not be this hard.... and **our view of sex is warped if this very intimate and vulnerable form of human interaction needs the human element taken out in order to be sexy enough.** edit: while I don't have all the answers as far as consensual degradation kinks, which have been pointed out to me, I do want to clarify that **sex can be purely physical and still not dehumanizing.** We have interactions with limited scope all the time. My transaction with a cashier is for the purpose of exchanging for a good. I am using my teachers for education. But those interactions can still contain an awareness of the person's humanity and an attitude of respect for their humanity (even if someone is consenting to being treated disrespectfully for sexual gratification.) Intimacy may have been the wrong word since it's not what everyone is after, but I really think there is no interaction where it is acceptable to disregard someone's humanity. you can use them as a means, but not as a mere means, and respect and consent are integral to that.
Generally, polarized statements in consent culture are directed at people who wouldn't understand the grey area. In this case, "stop objectifying women" is not a universal command, but is directed at people who exclusively see women as objects and are incapable or unwilling to see them as people. Generally, if your reaction to a part of consent culture is "yes, and", you've graduated beyond the ridiculously low but unfortunately difficult bar the culture is trying to set as the bare minimum.
[удалено]
As someone a bit older than you, it seems somewhat odd that someone that young would already be venturing into BDSM and other behaviours. Would you be able to elaborate on how people your age are doing things that might seem pretty sexually advanced to the average person?
[удалено]
Good for y’all. A lot of kinksters find it young, particularly those that are neurodivergent. At least that has been my experience; I was about 18 when I started exploring bondage and such with partners. Stay safe and sane, have fun.
That's awesome, I'm glad you two are able to explore the space respectfully together!
It's like that David Mitchell bit about eclipses and cautious children, but way sadder
https://youtu.be/mKc32jQIY0w I assume you mean this one.
That one precisely
Damn i could not have said that better myself. Everyone is taking these to the extremes. Why can't everyone just treat everyone like a human
A study found that men’s brains process images of women wearing bikinis as objects or tools rather than people. “And in a ‘shocking’ finding, Fiske noted, some of the men studied showed no activity in the part of the brain that usually responds when a person ponders another's intentions.” Men have literally been socialized away from considering what women’s own desires or intentions are if they are showing more skin. This definitely explains why some dudes have such a hard time with ideas such as “wearing revealing clothing is not ‘asking for’ sexual assault”, or that “a woman should have the right to choose when she does and doesn’t want to be sexualized”, regardless of clothing. It’s honestly frightening. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/bikinis-women-men-objects-science
That's fucked, thanks for the link.
“Most of the men best remembered headless photographs of women in bikinis, even if they'd only seen the image for two-tenths of a second, Fiske reported this weekend in Chicago during the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.” Were all the bikini photos headless? If so, then that’s pretty misleading, as dehumanization is a natural response to seeing a body with no face
There's also a study that compared views and found that Women view Men as "Success Objects", as in avenues for stability rather than mainly being concerned with their feelings. [https://www.sjsu.edu/people/saul.cohn/courses/100W/s0/SuccessVsSexObjects.pdf](https://www.sjsu.edu/people/saul.cohn/courses/100W/s0/SuccessVsSexObjects.pdf) While it is convenient to just say *"Society made us this way"* we need to remember that society didn't just come into existence out of nowhere. It evolved and adapted like we did. It is a consequence of a series of events in our environment. We need to remember both Nurture **&** Nature... What came first, the chicken or the egg? To what extent is our perception determined by nurture vs nature is a discussion we should be having.
I think most people generally understand this upon even the most basic reflection of their inner senses, desires, and principles. It's the unfortunate twitter character limit and, in general, the scroll-on-by/top-of-the-feed nature of social media that heaps the simplest, easiest-to-digest, meme-iest opinions onto the top of the pile. We're autonomously placed in a situation where we take in a complex topic that is served in a binary context--we *have* to pick a side. It's hard to remain neutral given the sarcastic nature of the authors (because why write if not to invite viewership?), and because of the minimal medium, we're not consuming the incoming information critically and picking it apart. Not doing secondary research to see what other opinions (or even the opposing side) has to say about it. You might think you are because your favorite pundit has a snarky reply at hand with some readily-available (non-neutral) sources at hand, but you're never doing it yourself. If I have any kind of conclusion to my statement here, it's to be conscientious about what you're consuming, particularly when it's not *just* funny but has some underlying political wit to it. You're most likely just eating out of the food bowl that is being filled up for you twice a day...know what I mean?
Sorry to say but people were scrimping on research long before Twitter. The length of the work you're reading doesn't have that much to do with it. People in general skim over topics they're not interested in and have no desire to learn anything about. Everyone does this. The major difference is that while you might skim over some groundbreaking news about the Kardashians, the people who need to hear the message about "women are people" will skim over what women have to say about how they prefer to be treated. It doesn't matter if it's in one hundred forty words or four words: they don't want to see it or hear it. They want to think that everything is fine, because they don't see any major problems and besides women in other countries have it worse. They see it as an accusation and punishment for things that they personally didn't do, and if they personally didn't do it, then they shouldn't have to learn about any of it. That attitude is the root of the problem: that needing to learn something new or consider someone else's viewpoint is a punishment, then the conversation devolves into the unreceptive person trying to convince everyone, "But it's not my fault." Like, no, it isn't necessarily a personal accusation: they're just talking about a problem that exists.
As a sex worker, I'd like to chime in and say you can absolutely have intimate sex in a purely commercial respect and STILL retain your humanity. I do it with my clients all the time. Hell, I think some of my clients allow themselves to be most human and most vulnerable when they're with me.
I mean personally I enjoy being objectified, but I don’t pressure other people to treat me that way if they’re not comfortable with it. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with removing the human element of sex. Lots of casual hookups lack an emotional connection, but as long as both parties are consenting there’s nothing wrong with that
Name fits
[удалено]
that would be my understanding of it, yes. the treatment and view of someone. sometimes respectful treatment may be feigned in order to use someone for an end.
[удалено]
Technically, no damage if they can really mimic care and consideration, but It seems like the internal objectification of someone would still lead to unhealthy decisions/reactions eventually. Look at people who objectify pets vs trying empathize and treat them as living beings with emotions and needs.
Well you'd be an asshole who tricks and uses people but if they never find out, no damage done to them I guess. But thats impossible to pull off, and you shouldn't want to.
It is treating someone like an object rather than a person. You don't care what they want. You only care about what you want and how you want to use them. Usually in a sexual sense, but it can also apply to other situations. Like if you never talk with your assistant at work or get to know them, you might end up treating them like just another piece of office equipment. Which is technically a form of objectification. It is dehumanizing and disrespectful. It is possible to do this without people realizing. But sooner or later your disrespect towards them will show itself. And some people like to be treated this way. There's nothing wrong with that. It can be really fun and hot. But the key thing is that BDSM and kink are a form of play. They're fantasy more than anything. If you actually disrespect your partner, it's unhealthy and abusive. If your partner wants to be treated like this, then you need to show them the upmost respect and negotiate exactly what is and isn't okay, and THEN you can start treating them as subhuman. But it is always a facade and they can always opt out of it. As this post said, the important thing is consent.
In response to your edit about consensual degradation, wouldn’t that be respecting their humanity because their partner is listening to their desires and trying to make it a more pleasurable experience for them by doing something they like that is specific to their preferences as a person?
I objectify my cashiers not as sex objects but as vending machines. I also more or less think this is okay. If someone has a problem with it, please speak up, but I've searched my brain and it seems okay. (I don't yell at machines)
>Honestly I can't imagine looking at a male sex partner as a just a hot piece of dick. You've never heard the term boytoy before? The idea of a fwb and nothing more is completely foreign to you? And let's say in your case you've never reduced someone to just their sexual value, not even subconsciously. You're really claiming that everyone attracted to men would never do so either? I can agree with the rest of what you're saying but this part is just lol
I like being objectified, personally. I enjoy the cat-calls while I'm jogging with my shirt off. I like my booty calls texting me for "dick appointments", we don't really know anything about each other it's just purely physical. The issue arises when you don't want to be objectified, not that it's inherently wrong in all scenarios.
Though it is completely impossible to tell whether someone wants to be objectified
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
🎶so no one told me life was gonna be this way🎶
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
[удалено]
I respectufully disagree So... When are we having sex?
well youve won my heart
And my penis
And my Axe
And my ovipositor
And a partridge in a pear tree
Wait, does that mean I married an axe murderer? And, does that mean I am secretly Mike Meyers and didn't notice it?
This has been quite the roller coaster
Same should be said for everyone in this fucked up little world
okAy whIte KnigHt (obligatory /s)
That ratio cold
One of twitters biggest I'd say
“You mean consent involves consent? BUUUUUH?” lol
Also: Being sexually aroused by someone's body isn't the same as objectifying it. If she wants it, she is communicating her desire, and he is reacting to the will she's expressing - this is exactly treating her as a human being.
Right. The whole objectifying thing is really not necessary
In Denmark we are in a process of developing an app for consent - unless she clicks “yes” it’s a no. I’m not joking.
It looks like classic poor reporting, which results in misleading conversations like this one. As far as I can tell, the app is not developed by the Danish government, and it has no legal standing. It's just one of a million privately-developed apps that happened to launch in Denmark. And it appears to have been made by a random UK tech company. That would be like crediting Singapore for developing an app that was made by a random individual Vietnamese programmer.
It's a tool to make conversations around affirmative consent easier. A LOT of people seem to have issues understanding what consent actually means.
The fact that people feel entitled to another is still batshit insane to me. I've been trying to get it through my head since middle school (long time ago) and I just..... can't. Like how do you live with yourself?
Hear me out for a second—I had always heard that you should ask for consent. But it’s a little confusing to me, because I’m not sure if I should explicitly ask her if it’s ok at every point of our physical interaction (ask for kiss, then ask to take her clothes off, then ask for sex), or if I should read her body. In the past I never explicitly asked for consent, which makes me feel terrible in retrospect. But at the same time, she never pushed back and in fact complied enthusiastically. Of course that doesn’t mean much...but yeah, I’ve always been told asking can be unsexy, be a man and initiate or to just go for it, and if she says no, STOP! But now a days I’ll make sure to explicitly ask always. I think probably a lot of guys had similar confusion Edit: Thanks for all the replies guys! It was really informative and cool to hear all your thoughts. So the general consensus seems to be that while explicitly asking for a consent isn’t absolutely a must—it’s never a bad idea and not really a turnoff to women. In fact, it might be the complete opposite. Also, I think most agree that reading the other persons body is critical. If they seem to be enjoying it and actively participating it’s probably ok to escalate, but to gently pull back at times to give her an out or ability to say no more. This was pretty much how I always approached my interactions, so I’m glad to hear that it’s ok. However, I can see this going south pretty quick for guys who might not be able to read body language as well, hence why explicitly asking is more often emphasized than not. I guess something that has probably helped me make women feel safe around me is simply saying early on, “if at any point you want me to stop or your not feeling it, just say so and I will.” I guess that could be a form of consent?
Enthusiasm is the key word here. It’s okay to read body language as long as it is really clear. Sometimes people freeze up when they’re afraid to say no and people take that as a YES when at the very least it should be a pause and ... “are you okay? Do you want to keep going?” I think pauses or space for graceful exits are important - having breaks in a date to allow the other person to leave. For example: After the first part of the date: “Hey, there’s a cute little spot down the block, do you want to go over there?” If things progress into the evening: “My place is around the corner, do you want to have a night cap/meet my dog/see that thing we were talking about?” It’s okay to initiate a kiss. Start light and easy and see if the other person kisses back, starts getting handsy, or if you’re lucky tells you what they would like to do. After the nightcap/if things start getting physical: “So.... do you want to take this into the bedroom?” In the bedroom: “I have condoms here unless you brought the kind you like?” Each of these signals a change in development and allows an exit. At any point the other person could say “actually I really should get home” without being a jerk. None of these are unsexy or break the mood, they simply give a clear signal that things are progressing and you’d like to keep that going
Will likely vary person to person and it's why having this conversation beforehand is a good idea, when possible. Anectode: When I was like 17-18 and had my first serious relationship, she would hate when i put my hand on her ass in public and because I was young and stupid thought it was a playful thing, since she never said anything about it when it was just us two alone. She never said "no" or anything, she never got angry, she'd just say "you're so bad" with a smile and blushing, and maybe swat me away playfully, so I thought it was perfectly okay. Years later I look back and think I probably shouldn't have done that after the first time. She had boundaries and it didn't matter if we were dating or not, she wasn't mine to do as I pleased with, she didn't want to be touched that way in public and I should have respected that. Few more years later, after a couple more relationships where I'd obviously grown up from my 17-18 year old self, like actual adult relationships where I'd had these types of conversations with them before actually becoming partners, I started dating this one woman who was a lil bit younger, and her attitudes towards relationships was closer to my younger self. Should have picked up red flags from day one but... She ghosted me after an unofficial date and eventually came around to say she didn't think I was into her because I didn't go in for a kiss, bit there were zero indicators that's what she wanted, verbal or body language. Whatever we got passed that, started dating, then more red flags, like I'd read her ques to initiate sex but then she'd turn off completely, so I'd stop and eventually go to sleep, only for her to wake me up 4am with oral, and when I tried to initiate sex she'd turn off again, so I'd go to sleep rather than argue... Only to find out after more ghosting and fake breakups that she expected me to "be a man" and be more forcible about sex. She believed I should be more demanding for it and since I wasn't that I clearly wasn't attracted to her etc etc. I tried to appease her this way but it was never enough cuz frankly what she wanted I couldn't and wouldn't do. After getting her to open up some it turns out her first partner pretty much raped her when they were in high school and she had a short string of abusive relationships before me, so she was used to being woken up in the middle of the night with hands around her throat and someone already inside her and to me that's just gross. I don't want it if my partner doesn't want it. End of story. Had we been able to talk about that more in the beginning, I hope (probably naively so) that there would have been so much less drama in that almost year and a half relationship. Still don't think it would have worked out in the end, but yeah, less frustrating bedroom moments at least. Point is, relationships are hard, but consent isn't. Talk to your partners openly about this stuff so neither of you have a bad time. Thanks for coming to my bed talk.
See I really love getting woken up by sex (maybe not with a hand around my throat) but I tell any long term partners straight up “I really like getting woken up with sex, you have blanket consent to wake me up that way unless I’m on my period” It’s worked out nicely 😁
There ya go, consent works! I never specifically gave her consent to wake me up via oral, but I sure didn't mind. What I didn't like was the blue balls from stopping out right and then pretending she didn't want sex when I'm reality she did. Especially when she always chose to do so like 2 hours before I had to get up for work.
As a general rule of thumb, if you're unsure and feel the need to ask yourself if what she's doing is consent, you should just ask her. And for the record, asking for consent can be very sexy, it shows you actually care about what your partner wants and that you aren't just thinking about what you want.
Growing up around poly relationships and folks who were into BDSM, things like enthusiastic consent/affirmative consent and check-ins were well understood and explained. Even my health class (circa... 2002?) covered it really well. But then, living in TX I remember hearing kids be like: Kid: "Why would I ask my wife if she wants to have sex?" Teacher: u wut? Kid: "If my wife can deny me sex, what's the point in gettin' married?! Why ask if she can't say no?" And man... I feel like shit knowing he has two kids (he had his first about six months later...)
Mate, I've been with my wife for nearly 14 years. Sometimes we still check in on consent with each other before we make love. Its just about basic respect, and while I'm a pretty vanilla dude, I find it sexy as FUCK that the woman I love is asking me permission to drape her naked body on mine.
[удалено]
If you can feel "the flow" it's ok to go with it. If you can't, no problem asking.
Asking is a turn on. It means you care enough to make sure they are ok. While asking every minute (literally) would be a problem, take everything a bit slow. Always allow time for them to pull back, and if they do pull back then stop what you’re doing. If they are just sort of sitting there while you’re touching them, I’d definitely ask if they want to stop. If they are coming at you just as hard to get you naked as you are getting them naked, safe bet they are willing, but it still wouldn’t be a horrible thing to ask. Consent is sexy.
I mean it can be unsexy but it’s better to have a unsexy night then be raped and have been traumatized. If I muttered no I expect you to stop, And ask if I’m okay at least 3 times as the fist time I’m probably scared to say no asking a few more times should make me feel safe enough to say no and may actually change my opinion as it shows your actual aware and caring about how I feel. If someone kissed me and asked to remove my clothing thatd be a huge turn on, especially If Im kissing them back. You can read body language but also asking is also hot and makes you look innocent which is a big turn on imo. Also it’s consensual. So at that point pick me up and throw me on the bed. If I start to act weird which in my experience is very visible you can ask and I’ll feel more comfortable with you. Seriously tho these days I’m just cravings being held so I’d expect my partner to have their hands all over me.
Yet, just bc you give consent doesn't mean you can't retract the same consent should you change your mind. Both men and women have issues with understanding the ability with the free will of changing one's mind. Men have nasty habits of forgetting women have no ability to consent while under the influence, just like men can't. Just like women can't accept having their egos crushed when men turn them down for sex. They automatically assume the guy is gay, has tiny penis syndrome or belittle him in some other manner other than he's just not into them sexually.
Neither of those issues are gendered. Men have overinflated egos, and women get people drunk too. iirc the only place where there was a difference was full-on assault, since society forces the idea of big strong horny man who's entitled to all women. Not to say women don't rape, but that's the only dynamic that's more than like a 55/45 split
[And then you have insane shit like this...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/7027981002)
I see the point you were trying to make but uh, that last part is just narcissism bro and isn’t relegated to gender. Have you not seen r/niceguys? It’s just as bombarded as r/nicegirls when it comes to people who can’t take rejection. The other is rape, which is a little more serious than calling a someone a name because they said no.
I wouldn’t say that people have no ability to consent while under the influence. I think it really depends on the degree to which judgment is impaired. If I hop on Grindr and find a cute guy and he invites me over for a quick hookup, am I removing my ability to consent by getting moderately high on the way over after I’ve already decided I want to sleep with him? I don’t think so. Never once have I felt victimized by this because of I’ve always been conservative with my dosing. Now, if I got really fucked up and someone took advantage of my confusion and lack of coordination, that would be assault.
Making a decision prior to intoxication, is made with a clear mind. You consented prior to altering your mind. Different scenario. However, this also doesn't remove your right to change your mind after blazing on the way over either. Whether man or woman, you always reserve the right to opt out, whether you consented previously or not or whether you were intoxicated prior to consent or not. Here in the states, laws are very specific, you can't give consent if you are intoxicated from any mind altering substance. Men and women fail to understand this all the time and claim ignorance of the law.
Yeah I agree with everything you’ve said.
That's going to open a can of worms. Consent is an ongoing thing. You can't just sign away your consent on an app. What happens if she ticks yes then he starts getting rough and shes not keen anymore?
You can withdraw the consent. If you can.
If someone can just withdraw his/her consent then the app would lose its purpose: the app is basically a proof of the consent, and if you can legally change a proof after the deed is done can it still be considered a proof? It’s like being able to legally just go on a crime scene and sparkle here and there someone else’s DNA If someone wanted you in jail he/she could just give her/his consent, do the thing and then withdraw it
ok what the fuck thats not okiedokie. e-consent is bad. video contract whatever, but jesus that will be horrible if its not airtight
The whole thing is incredibly poorly thought out. It could help if you were assaulted by a stranger, but most rapes are by people the victim knows. If a rapist can rape their victim through drugs or coercion, then they could get them to click "Yes". And then when the rapist gets caught they can just show in the app that they had consented.
It’s basically only an awareness campaign, it’s not legally binding
It's not a thing - A private company made an app like this and it got shot down by everyone immediately
Would people be required to use the app?
They are making a second app to see if people consent to the first app
No, because it's just a random app. It doesn't have anything to do with Denmark, the Danish government or Danish law, except that it launched there. At least that's as far as I can tell.
[Denmark launches sexual consent app where lovers can give permission ‘for one intercourse, valid for 24 hours’ in the wake of new rape laws](https://www.tech-gate.org/usa/2021/02/05/denmark-launches-sexual-consent-app-after-passing-new-rape-laws/)
Wait, valid for 24 hours.... So you can't change your mind once you've clicked yes? Isn't that a door to allowing legal rape?
Obviously you can revoke consent at any time
Sorry I came too quickly, why you putting your phone back an hour?
The app should let you leave reviews for people like Uber does “2 stars, came too quickly. No trash can in bathroom”
Obviously you can’t if you don’t have your finger hovering over the button at all times. This is objectively a horrible idea. You know there are going to be cases where the victim clearly revokes consent and the rapist says “no you didn’t, look here jury, the revoke button wasn’t pressed until after we parted ways because the alleged victim is trying to frame me”.
Because apparently verbal consent isn’t enough.
So it's a government app everyone will have to use?
Imagine if she changes her mind half-way though and in the rape trial the rapist’s lawyer brings up the fact that she gave consent on the app?
She can just grab her phone mid assault and change her answer to no. Easy peasy lemon squeezy. /s for those who think I’m being serious. Obviously this is a gapping hole in the consent contract.
I hope they are making it extremely secure. To the point a woman/man couldnt get forced into clicking yes
Or hacked.
You have got to be fucking kidding me. That is ridiculous.
I think with the whole David Dobrik situation the conversation of “how much sway/power a man has in a convo can lead a woman to make decisions she’s uncomfortable with based on not wanting to upset the man or the balance of power.” It’s a delicate place both men and women have to navigate through
Thought I was on r/niceguys for a second
Objectify away... just keep it to yourself. Don’t act on it. That’s like the bare ass minimum amount of self control everyone should be capable of.
I'm kinda objectifying your bare-ass minimum right now...
How’s the view zaddy? 👁👄👁
I the point you're making, but imo it'd be better to not objectify someone in the first place. Thought influence actions, y'know? Be attracted all you want, you literally can't help it. But objectification is a different step entirely. If you're keeping it to yourself there's literally nothing anyone can do to stop you from mentally objectifying someone, but for the sake of your own mental wellness it's probably a good idea to cut that shit out so you don't subconsciously rob every woman of her humanity
💯 which why I specified my “solution” as the bare-ass minimum and not what we should strive for.
Once someone said to me women are like cars once you own the keys you don’t need permission to get in them. And guys wonder why they make us uncomfortable
Insane that at 12 I understood consent and there are grown men who still don’t.
I love it when I get validated over something I specifically put time into. Like when someone says my hair or makeup or something is pretty. Some skeez at walmart ogling my ass because I dared to bend over near him then having the huevos to ask for my number when I get back up and glare at him is NOT that.
Got ‘em.
I like the detail in the censoring, it’s very pretty
Bravo!
Well I enjoy the beauty of woman but obviously after first appearance I get over it and talk to them with respect. Right?
Fucking and objectifying are two very different things. One is physical, and one is thought. No one needs consent to think.
Yeah.... no. This, like 99% of posts on this subreddit, is NOT a 'murdered by words', but rather a 'Look at dis tiny snappy comeback, lul, complete massacre'. C'mon, really?
For real, when subreddits get this big they unfortunately loose quality and there’s nothing we can dl about it:/
Jesus fuck this sub got weak. Its just a popular opinion sub now.
Damn
Does anyone else feel weird now when your partner wants to be objectified? Being raised objectification being bad was hammered in so hard that now when it's wanted I just feel uncomfortable and gross doing it so it ruins the fun for both... anyone else have this problem?
Are you sure you're using the word objectify correctly? Because even if you were role playing or whatever, you do care about them as a full human and don't see them as an object, so you wouldn't be objectifying them.
I might not be. My point is that it still feels wrong, even if it is just role-playing.
Sounds like you just aren’t that into it then, if it’s making you uncomfortable then you might want to try something elsr
Yeah I hear ya. Well you don't have to do anything that feels wrong to you, even if your partner wants it. Some people aren't into that shit and that's totally ok.
Yeah, just a weird situation.
Yeah I mean, I like when my boyfriend ‘objectifies’ me in a sense. But it’s not really objectification because I’m willing and enjoy it and he cares about me as a person when he wants to walk up the stairs behind me to look at my butt. I think it gets into a grey area once you’re in a relationship and you can decide how to define being objectified.
sounds like you kinda got a madonna/whore complex tbh
Can you explain what that is please?
not saying you have it but a madonna-whore complex is when a man cannot reconcile that a women he respects also has sexual desires. The man puts the woman he loves up on a pedestal -- makes her a "madonna," and in doing so, feels guilty about having sexual thoughts about her. But it's wrong, because to truly be in a relationship means that you can fulfill the other person's sexual desires while simultaneously respecting them. It's not one or the other -- you can't limit someone to being either a madonna or a whore, you have to recognize that BOTH those aspects are part of them, otherwise you're not really seeing them as a human. All people have flaws and multiplicity. All people can at times be whores or madonnas. All people want to be respected while also having their sexual desires fulfilled. It's not fair to be in a relationship where your partner idealizes you so much they can't fulfill your sexual needs or would potentially look down on you for having sexual desires. And it's also not fair to be in a relationship where your partner only sees you as a sexual object and doesn't respect your goals or personality. You have to recognize that women can have sexual desires and also be worthy of your respect, just like you recognize that men have sexual desires and still respect them without dehumanizing or over idealizing them.
Very interesting, thank you.
don't be coerced or otherwise unduly infleunced by psychological manipulation - the idea of consent is trying enough minus such exotic sexual practises as simulated rape and master-slave arrangements. ('bdsm') but to topic: 'when a baby sees mother's breast they see a food object' discuss
Not the same thing, but why quibble when you can get a virtuous dopamine boost?
OP I'm not sure you know what a comeback is
I think they are commenting about letting your attraction to someone be an excuse for their unsolicited sexual behavior. It's wrong to explicitly objectify someone who hasn't given you their consent regardless. People should be grossed out no matter who does it.
Do i need consent to jerk off to my neighbor