@Botond173's banner p

Botond173


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

				

User ID: 473

Botond173


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 06:37:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 473

True. I'll point out though that, to refer back to the comment I quoted, were it fashion modeling that she set out to do instead of pop music, she's certainly tall and slim enough for it.

I was referring to women who do all of those things online i.e. in front of the camera, for money. I guess it wasn't worded clearly enough. The women who currently engage in this are, as far as I can tell, average women from average places; they may come from broken homes, but again, broken homes today are so frequent as to be close to average. Their activities are normal in the sense that nobody bats an eye even. There's no scandal, no outrage. Nobody can try generating outrage about this and at the same time retain a safe, mainstream status in society. Nobody cares.

Men who say such things about themselves rather pointedly don't care to cultivate an image of themselves as dutiful, modest (boring) family men.

I'm not going to fundamentally disagree but I ask you to consider what % of women "within one standard deviation of the median" are fat or frumpy.

"'Black fatigue' does not equal 'fatigue caused by blacks'! Trust me bro!" - an avid fan of Steve Sailer somewhere, probably

Polite, yes. Country girl, yes. Modestly dressed, sure (back then, that is). Going through a string of guys, presumably sleeping with them at least once? Absolutely.

while the porn actress often is not

You mean not fun for the woman in the relationship to roleplay? :)

I just realized that I skipped over the word 'dearly' in the original comment. My bad. Altogether I agree with the general point that society as a whole is generally not comfortable with any man having sex for 'free' in the rather wide sense of the word, especially when that free boning is taking place in the context of cohabiting, for example.

On a somewhat related note, do scantily clad pop singers usually earn significantly more than porn actresses? I wonder.

Back in the days it was 'possessiveness' that hippie chicks complained about, for example.

So that when a woman sees a man getting sexual gratification without paying dearly for it, she instinctively finds it very threatening. So for example, if a female pop star becomes wealthy in part by flaunting her body on stage, women tend to be okay with it. But if that same woman instead flaunts her body for a porn mag for $200 a week, women tend to get outraged.

But the pop star is getting paid in both cases, assuming it's not a free gig. The men ogling her still have to pay up.

See my reply to FiveHourMarathon below.

Quoting two comments from a Manosphere blog in 2012:

If you've ben following along, since Swift became "legal", she's been riding the carousel with abandon, going through men like water and using them as fodder for her songs. This is the essence of her popularity -- not purity, far from it, but because she writes about her real experiences riding the alpha carousel, and other women her age range (let's cast that net broadly at 15-30) relate to what she is singing very much.

It's hard to call her a slut, really, because she represents the new normal for women her age. Now granted she is far, far prettier than normal (she has truly model-level looks and would have clearly been a quasi-supermodel (or a full-blown one) had she not been musically talented. And I don't think her "innocence" schtick was an act, either -- I think, again, it reflects the mindset of many women in that age swipe who see themselves as being fundamentally innocent yet very sexually active -- which is the way Swift portrays herself.

In short Taylor Swift is the poster girl for the contemporary young woman -- a very supermodel-ish poster gitl, to be sure, but her popularity among her female fans (who are the overwhelming majority of her fanbase) has to do with her singing about experiences that are similar to their own, which has been the case for many of her songs, not just this one. This is the first big one about a ONS with an alpha, whereas the others have been about serial monogamy with alphas, but, as Dalrock points out well, these are really two sides of the same coin, and the former is something that most women who are doing the latter engage in a couple of times (or more, for some).

See, I don't think that the culture in general considers young women who have an occasional "it just happened" animal attraction ONS to be sluts. Nice girls do this, and remain nice girls as long as they don't do it regularly. That is, as long as the ratio is 70%+ serial monogamy and 30% or less animal attraction ONSs, your "nice girl card" isn't revoked. Taylor Swift is still a nice girl, therefore, who has the occasional ONS, and writes about it (just like she writes about her serial monogamy stuff with alpha males).

She's still not a slut, really. A slut is Ke$ha, not Taylor Swift. The threshold for sluthood is very high in this culture, which means Swift can still be a nice girl and engage in occasional promiscuous behavior -- because in 2012 that's what nice girls do. As long as a certain threshold isn't passed, she's still a nice girl and not a slut -- like Taylor Swift. And a huge proportion of 15-30 age women relate 100% to this.

So...yeah. According to the "new normal", she isn't a slut per se.

I don't think Taylor Swift or Pink ever had an early good modest girl image though.

I was describing the cultural milieu that present-day high schoolers have grown up in. It's also the only world they've ever known. For one thing, the idea that their female peers are capable of sexual shame, even if its source are images that don't exist in real life, isn't something many of them can grok.

War re-enactors?! No, these are neckbeards playing dress up. They want to be hailed for their assiduous attention to historical detail and accuracy, not their "heroism." Even if airsoft, which is pseudo-athletic, most of the time is spent geeking out over hyperrealistic gear, rather than drilling movement to contact.

I guess there is a fine line between cosplay and military reenactment, isn't there?

This is something I’ve been thinking about lately, but I feel burlesque is sort of spiritually akin to male war reenactors. They are both reenacting the past to give themselves gender valdiating experiences, men getting to pretend to experience heroism and self-sacrifice in combat, frumpy feminists getting to experience a reenactment of sexual desirability

Well, damn. I never thought about all that this way before.

I suppose this is a reference to her stage parents?

An explanation does not equal a justification. I didn't disagree with the OP but again, it ignored the wider social context of all of this entirely. Which is fair, but I thought it'd be warranted to respond in a different comment.

And the Freudian analysis is probably correct. Also, I didn't just have female soloists in mind but various K-pop girl groups as well.

there is a pattern of female singers leading mostly-male instrumental bands having more male fanbases than female singers who rely on session musicians

There is in fact such a pattern in certain metal genres that has basically become the butt of jokes and meme material among male metal fans.

You could imagine how irritating it is to hear that men spend 30 minutes a day jerking off to porn for decades and then one of them finally gets to fuck you and has no idea how to bring you to orgasm and you leave the experience totally unsatisfied. Consistently!

And that is surprising...how? Visual porn normally caters to men, not women. Of course it doesn't normally work as a training film for bringing women to orgasm. Duh. It's the equivalent of reading romance novels in order to learn how to please men.

Well, I suppose if you’re a pop singer who started out as a teenage girl and you aren’t explicitly Christian, keeping up your clueless romantic virgin schoolgirl persona becomes tiresome, limiting and cringe after you turn 21 or so in a society where premarital sex is normalized. Thankfully I’m not that knowledgeable about this entire sleazy subject but as far as I can tell, Britney Spears also had scarce intentions herself of maintaining her good girl image after a while.

(On a related note, do all such pop singers have sleazy old men a managers? I wonder.)

Because it became normalised first in sexual relationships, when men started asking for what they saw in porn.

Hold up. So where was it normalized first? Real life or porn?

It's still fanservice just with a feminist veneer.

In a nutshell, indeed it is.

I can see it now, thanks.

Resort to online dating apps in general? Sure. To do so in order to find a husband? Rather unlikely. What percentage of college-educated middle-class women are on dating apps anyway? I mean as a lifestyle choice, not as a fad that they engage in for 3 weeks.

The reddit URL returns a deleted post.

The general social consensus seems to be that complaining about anything pretty women do is low status and petty, and complaining about anything ugly women do in any way is needlessly mean-spirited. It’s generally understood that many women are needlessly petty, but for a man to point that out openly is itself generally dismissed as a sign of pettiness.