Has the #Metoo movement made men more unsure how to relate with women?

[Edmundus1581]

Can someone please explain to me why this thread has spent two days and dozens of posts discussing men, porn and chastity, when it has nothing to do with the topic?

Of the many posts I’ve seen on porn by men in CAF, nearly every one has been from someone admitting a problem and asking for advice and help. They are usually sincere and heartfelt in their struggles, and yet now they are being held up for discussion and “holier-than-thou” criticism.

In seven years here I can only recall one man who identifies as Catholic arguing that porn is OK. Perhaps there have been some non-Catholics, but they have only been temporary members who join for sake of arguing with Catholics.

Moreover, it has already previously been agreed many times in CAF that porn is bad and that extra-marital sex is, in itself, not as problematic as porn and masturbation. It isn’t the question here, no one has asserted otherwise, and yet somehow you’ve spent two days saying it all over and over and over… again.

The only thing this discussion has contributed is to have given the impression that there is a contingent of Catholic men in CAF who are arguing that they can indulge in porn while they wait for a virginal wife. Which is a lie, and yet, by being assumed here may now become accepted as fact.

What???

I’m sure we all have had CAF encounters with single young men who think that their future wife should be their own personal sexbot/maidbot, and think that it’s just feminism that stands between them and a wife who joyously cooks, cleans and has sex 24/7. (Not that cooking, cleaning and sex don’t have their place–but it’s not a full adult life.)

I’ve never seen that attitude in CAF. If there is, it’s such a minority of the men as to not be worth considering - unless you want to tar all men with the same brush.

 

[anon64350612]

I have noticed that women are covering up more on TV. For example, all the women dancers on the super bowl halftime show were completely covered up except for a couple of women wearing crop tops with their long pants. No cleavage, etc. At least none that I could see. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Xantippe]

Can someone please explain to me why this thread has spent two days and dozens of posts discussing men, porn and chastity, when it has nothing to do with the topic?

I felt the same way when it spent the first couple days on the subject of abortion. In fact I had a couple of posts myself nudging the thread back on track.

However, porn and chastity are a lot more obviously connected to the question of how men relate to women. If a large number of men (even men who are fighting porn habits) are walking around wearing porn goggles, it is inevitably going to affect how they see and relate to women. In fact, now that they are fighting their porn habits, it may even contribute to a situation where they see women primarily in terms of sin and temptation, rather than as people.

Petra also had an interesting exchange with SacredHeart Bassist (starting around 126) where SHB was saying that dating seemed not worth it due to the risk of misunderstandings, and Petra was pointing out that Catholic dating has almost nothing in common with the dating travails of somebody like Aziz Ansari who is going for first date sex.

So, you will find that the subjects do dovetail fairly naturally.

I’ll probably have more to say in a bit–but I would say that one of the difficulties of this thread is that there aren’t actually a lot of men here who want to talk at length about the subject, which hampers discussion.

 

[TheOldColonel]

What genius came up with the idea of putting a pound sign # before the words me too? What’s pound me too? Is that some sort of strange request?

 

[Lea101]

It’s a tag on social media platforms, like Twitter

 

[TheOldColonel]

Thanks for the clarification. The Old Colonel doesn’t pound # much these days.

 

[Xantippe]

The only thing this discussion has contributed is to have given the impression that there is a contingent of Catholic men in CAF who are arguing that they can indulge in porn while they wait for a virginal wife.

There is a contingent on CAF who a) struggle with porn and b) believe that they are entitled to a virginal wife

or who

a) have a “past” of sexual immorality with various women and b) believe that they are entitled to a virginal wife.

It’s so common as to be almost a cliche. People who do that need to think about the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matthew 18:21).

I’ve never seen that attitude in CAF. If there is, it’s such a minority of the men as to not be worth considering - unless you want to tar all men with the same brush.

You’ve never seen CAF men who think that a wife is supposed to offer sex on demand, no matter what, or who think that a wife ought to be identical to a slave?

I guess we’ve been on different threads.

I didn’t say “all men.” I said, “I’m sure we all have had CAF encounters with single young men who think that their future wife should be their own personal sexbot/maidbot, and think that it’s just feminism that stands between them and a wife who joyously cooks, cleans and has sex 24/7.”

CAF has a large Red Pill/manosphere contingent, and my description of them is both fair and accurate.

 

[Rozellelily]

I haven’t seen the Super Bowl but I have noticed there have been discussions that the new Lara Croft movie that in it they cast an actress that was more “athletic appeal” and less sex appeal (like Angelina Jolie) and left out any gratuitous nude/showering/etc scenes.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Thanks for the replies and for addressing my points

Edmundus1581:

Can someone please explain to me why this thread has spent two days and dozens of posts discussing men, porn and chastity, when it has nothing to do with the topic?

However, porn and chastity are a lot more obviously connected to the question of how men relate to women. If a large number of men (even men who are fighting porn habits) are walking around wearing porn goggles, it is inevitably going to affect how they see and relate to women. In fact, now that they are fighting their porn habits, it may even contribute to a situation where they see women primarily in terms of sin and temptation, rather than as people.

Petra also had an interesting exchange with SacredHeart Bassist (starting around 126) where SHB was saying that dating seemed not worth it due to the risk of misunderstandings, and Petra was pointing out that Catholic dating has almost nothing in common with the dating travails of somebody like Aziz Ansari who is going for first date sex.

Agreed, porn is relevant to the topic of sexual relations where extra-marital sex is part of dating, and Azziz Anzari and the woman he dated are very relevant examples. But I don’t see that we as Catholics have much to say about that apart from both the porn and the extra-marital sex are wrong, plus, if someone’s actions are illegal then the police should be involved but if not, then just learn for the future.

My question relates to why this is worth two days of commentary on this question where you’ve simply restated what has already been agreed numerous times in CAF, is a basic of Catholic sexual morality, and no-one here has disputed.

My concern, as I remarked, is that this gives the impression you are actually correcting someone who has proposed the position you are correcting, and placed it in the context of #metoo for Catholics. This may then be accepted as a truism for the future.

There is also the context that porn problems are admitted quite regularly in CAF and mostly with the understanding that it is both a serious sin and a serious personal and relationship problem, not an entitlement or healthy activity. The two day discussion here may not be intended to be speaking about the brave men* who have come here for help, but it seems to have been.

*“men”. A smaller number of brave women have also admitted a problem, but your discussion has been entirely about men.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Edmundus1581:

The only thing this discussion has contributed is to have given the impression that there is a contingent of Catholic men in CAF who are arguing that they can indulge in porn while they wait for a virginal wife.

There is a contingent on CAF who a) struggle with porn and b) believe that they are entitled to a virginal wife

or who

a) have a “past” of sexual immorality with various women and b) believe that they are entitled to a virginal wife.

It’s so common as to be almost a cliche. People who do that need to think about the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matthew 18:21).

I’ve never seen that attitude in CAF. If there is, it’s such a minority of the men as to not be worth considering - unless you want to tar all men with the same brush.

You’ve never seen CAF men who think that a wife is supposed to offer sex on demand, no matter what, or who think that a wife ought to be identical to a slave?

I guess we’ve been on different threads.

I didn’t say “all men.” I said, “I’m sure we all have had CAF encounters with single young men who think that their future wife should be their own personal sexbot/maidbot, and think that it’s just feminism that stands between them and a wife who joyously cooks, cleans and has sex 24/7.”

CAF has a large Red Pill/manosphere contingent, and my description of them is both fair and accurate.

We must have been in different threads. I haven’t seen any of these posters you describe, and, as I mentioned in my first post, in my seven years here I’ve only seen one Catholic man even argue that porn is OK. I’ve certainly never seen any man argue that he he can indulge in porn or extra-marital sex himself yet is “entitled” (sic) to a virginal wife. My answer would be that no-one, male or female, is “entitled” to any expectation in a spouse. You take what you can get in dating (with gratitude!) or keep waiting.

 

[Xantippe]

Edmundus1581,

We’ve had some extremely lively discussions in the past with guys who despite their own checkered pasts, are holding out for a virgin bride. I’ve had a number of exchanges with “I wanna virgin bride!” types where I ask them about widows and victims of rape or molestation. A lot of guys who aren’t necessarily terrible (and who may themselves be reasonably chaste) are initially unclear on the fact that it’s possible for a woman to be chaste without possessing physical virginity. I’ve had that same conversation on CAF with many different guys.

With regard to the thread title, as I recall, in a previous thread, you were saying that your reaction to MeToo was going to be to stop hiring women in your business. That’s interesting, and I have to wonder if you have any daughters. If so, you wouldn’t even hire them in your business? Or are you planning on financially supporting them until their dying day? That’s going to be pretty rough on you. Hopefully, any grown daughters you have can work for others who don’t have your ideas.

Also, I have to ask. If you a) don’t hire women but b) are one of those guys actively discouraging younger men from getting married–how is this supposed to work? If there was some sort of mass movement of people like yourself refusing to hire women, how would that work out, if women are neither allowed to work nor allowed to get married? Frankly, it sounds like a national economic disaster, as well as a personal disaster for parents of grown daughters.

There is also the context that porn problems are admitted quite regularly in CAF and mostly with the understanding that it is both a serious sin and a serious personal and relationship problem, not an entitlement or healthy activity. The two day discussion here may not be intended to be speaking about the brave men* who have come here for help, but it seems to have been.

Sadly, it doesn’t even need to involve a lot of porn for religious conservative men to be so eaten up by lust that they can’t think of women as anything else than a source of sin and temptation.

When a guy is far gone, he just cannot even register the humanity of women. (And this is quite visible in many of CAF’s masturbation/porn threads.)

This is also true of a lot of CAF modesty threads where men with masturbation problems participate.

The worst consequences of male unchastity are not even necessarily seen in use of porn or masturbation, but in the complete absence of ability to see women as valuable or human or people who need to go about their normal lives. There’s a sexual version of the “dry drunk”–the guy who isn’t technically unchaste, but whose mind has been overpowered by temptation, and who is obsessed with sexual sin and seeing women entirely as tempting objects, and (even when thinking about marriage) thinks about his future wife almost entirely in terms of serving his appetites.

 

[Xantippe]

We must have been in different threads. I haven’t seen any of these posters you describe, and, as I mentioned in my first post, in my seven years here I’ve only seen one Catholic man even argue that porn is OK. I’ve certainly never seen any man argue that he he can indulge in porn or extra-marital sex himself yet is “entitled” (sic) to a virginal wife. My answer would be that no-one, male or female, is “entitled” to any expectation in a spouse. You take what you can get in dating (with gratitude!) or keep waiting.

I have seen those guys on CAF and elsewhere (for example, Dalrock) who think that it doesn’t matter that they have had non-marital sexual relationships and still insist on a virgin bride.

It’s a typical Red Pill/manosphere tic.