Body positivity is such a strange concept to me. There’s efforts to reclaim words while simultaneously calling them bad if used as an insult. Ideally, people wouldn’t be offended by someone describing their body with common descriptors, but socially there is so much value attributed to certain body types that it’s almost impossible to avoid having an emotional response of some kind to various descriptors.
For example, It’s not bad to be fat, but calling someone “fat” is almost universally considered a bad thing. The same definitely seems to go for the idea of being “short.”
I’m asking this question because I can’t put my finger on why but something seems to be different about the use of the term “short” from the use of the term “fat.” I think that part of it is how, to me at least, the term “fat” is so generic and hard to nail down to a discrete definition, implying that the word really doesn’t have a clear connection to reality. On the other hand, height is a single-dimensional number. You either are above a certain threshold, or you aren’t.
I recently learned that May 6th to May 10th is “short king week” because it’s 5’6" to 5’10" which then prompted me to search for the origins of “short king” and apparently the person most-credited with popularizing the term is Jaboukie Young-White who claims the term was meant to include all men under 6 feet tall. The average adult male height is 5’9" leaving men considered roughly average to be called “short” which is still considered an insult by many.
I dunno. As a term that was intended to champion body positivity compared with how the term is actually used, what do you think of “short king?”
As far as I can tell, “body positivity” is for ugly chicks. Pretty chicks don’t need it and physical attractiveness doesn’t exist for men.
As a man, the only thing about me that matters to anyone else is what value they can extract from me, and when the answer becomes “none” I will be discarded. Doesn’t matter if a man looks like the inside of a kidney as long as he can pick up the check. Everything else about you is irrelevant.
How long did it take to convince yourself of that one, haahaha
It’s obvious having ever met people.
What is? The lack of any differentiation on physical attraction between males?
Are you sure you’re not just deluding yourself that that doesn’t exist since you don’t like the position you’d fall into?
You’re saying there’s no difference in physical attractiveness between Brad Pitt and someone like this man?
Brad Pitt isn’t a real attractive man, he only plays one in movies. I’m sure both Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Anniston both told him his dick was both huge and tiny depending on how mad they were at him, and both of them lied both times.
You can believe in Russel’s Teapot as much as you want, even if it is true, which it obviously isn’t, it can’t possibly matter. Anyone who calls you handsome, who says they want to fuck you, who says they like you for who you are? They are lying to manipulate you. No one will ever like you for any reason. They will only pretend to like you so they can get money, things and chores from you. “That’s not true my wife genuinely loves me” Break your spine, lose your job and spend the rest of your life in a wheelchair, see how much longer she “loves you for who you are.”
So you’re saying there is ZERO DIFFERENCE in physical attractiveness between the two pictures I posted?
Jesus you’re bitter. You should look into psychedelic assisted therapy.
I’ve been offered money to have sex with women, several times.
Weird how they’ve given me money, things and done my chores if they only want those things from me, huh?
The reason you feel that way is that you’re a bitter misogynist who writes things like “that’s for ugly chicks”, while actively pretending attractiveness in men doesn’t exist so you don’t have to face being an “ugly chick” yourself.
Yeah, it’s true golddiggers exist, but if you stop being such a massive cunt you might one who isn’t.
But that’s all in your future, as I’m pretty positive I’m talking to a teenager who’s annoyed that his crush liked the boy with the more expensive phone or a newer vehicle of some sort, something to that effect.
You’ll get over it.
Give the second man the first man’s cosmetic surgery budget and they’d bear a striking resemblance. Or he could just pay people to call him whatever he wants to be called. I mean, Donald Trump has ever gotten laid. Whether attractiveness or repulsiveness in men exists, it doesn’t matter because no one uses it for anything.
Women’s worth is based on their physical appearance. Ugly women are worth less as people than pretty women, which is why “body positivity” is only ever mentioned by lumpy misshapen women and corporate advertising firms who want to sell them cosmetics. Men are not worth anything in and of themselves; their value is found in that they own and control. That’s how the world actually works, and hippy bullshit like “all lives matter” will never change that. NO LIVES MATTER, least of all yours and mine.
So you admit that there IS a difference in their physical attractiveness, which means that such a thing does exist, meaning you admit you said something you don’t actually believe in.
My point exactly.
Don’t worry, the bitterness of having crushed so hard on a person you didn’t even manage to talk to will fade when you grow up. Well, hopefully you do at some point at least. I don’t know how ugly you are, but it can’t be much uglier than your rhetoric. I suspect you keep reading some of the “tips” of others (internally and externally) ugly guys like whathisface who’s locked up in Romania.
I’m 36 years old, I’ve been around long enough to see the shame in people’s eyes when asked “What exactly do you want from me?” One man is more visibly damaged than the other. Vaginal wetness because of facial symmetry isn’t real. Vaginal wetness because a movie star’s pay means mansions and limousines is real. There aren’t legends of men so beautiful that women destroyed civilizations to be with him, because that’s not what men are valued for.
Teaching young men that they can be liked for who they are is just…harmful. To everyone outside of himself, a man is only as valuable as what you can get out of him. If you can’t get much out of him, he will be treated VERY badly, even worse if he dares to have needs of his own.
You have a great deal of value outside of how much money you make there are people out there interested in those qualities. I’m sorry you haven’t noticed them yet, but they are out there. Try to keep an open mind and an open heart and you may find them and they find you sooner than you think.
captain_aggravated is not talking about how he values himself. He’s talking about how society values him.
My hourly rate for day labor is $40/hr. I will not give you anything or do anything for you for free.
Do you think forty an hour is a flex? That’s like walk in off the street temp work that methheads and homeless people do lol. Even within the narrow confines of your pathetic worldview you are a complete loser lol.
Aren’t we all?
You know damn well that’s not what I meant and also that’s far too low these days, you should ask for more.
Hey you’re the perfect stranger asserting I have “value” despite having no possible idea what it might be. You might as well have said “Jesus loves you.” It would be equally untrue and I’d know whose bullshit you’re trying to get me to buy.
Lmao what trite contrarian bullshit, you yourself asserted your high value in this same comment thread.
Get over yourself.
I make more btw, cheers!
I didn’t assert myself as high valued. I asserted myself as non-free.
I don’t think most women are that cynical. Like do transactional relationships exist? Absolutely, but I don’t think that’s the majority of them and you probably don’t want that kind of relationship anyways.
In fact, in my experience, women are typically made uncomfortable when I try to insist on paying for the entire bill on a date.
I think for a lot of women, it’s as simple as, “am I comfortable and do I have fun when I’m hanging out with this guy?”.
But at the end of the day, women are not a monolith that all think and act the same. Just as men are not a monolith that all think and act the same. So it is unwise to assume all women want the same things out of a relationship.
Yeah here’s the thing about the women who just want to “be comfortable and have fun”…life has a way of becoming not comfortable or fun sometimes. Call up Little Miss “He makes me laugh” and tell her you’ve had a table saw accident and you need her to drive you to the hospital. See how much longer she sticks around.
I had a girl break up with me once because I said to her “I think I need to go to the dentist.” Like the next words she said to me were “I don’t think this is going to work out.” Whatever we were, it certainly wasn’t “friends.” Turns out I was right, I’ve got a polymer bicuspid now.
The women who want to be around you because you’re fun will walk out of the theater the second they’re no longer enjoying the show. It’s about what value they can extract from you. Always is.
Do you have any platonic relationships? Like family or friends? Are these relationships transactional for you as well?
There are people who have some of the same ancestors as me that I hear from once every couple of years when they need some furniture moved.
Damn that’s sad to hear man.
I think I now understand why you believe women are only interested in extracting value out of you. It’s because that’s how you’ve been treated. And further, you’ve accepted this as a universal truth. And when entering new relationships yourself, you start with the question, what value can I extract from this other person? That’s probably why you don’t have any male friends, because you can’t extract any value from them. And you self-select for romantic relationships in the same way. You’re stuck in a cycle. If you remain set in your view that relationships are transactional, it’s hard to imagine you ever experiencing one that is not.
Brother, these are super bizarre examples, and do not match my experience as a man whatsoever.
My past partners (and current too) absolutely would drive me to the hospital, even those with whom I just had a casual and completely financially independent relationship with. I even had an experience pretty similar to this in the past.
How does your world view account for relationships where the woman makes more money than the man?
Seems like somebody hurt you.
It is my understanding that these relationships are rare because of how many women categorically reject them, and relationships that didn’t start out that way up but get there via promotions/layoffs whatever are on borrowed time or doomed.
Do you personally view relationships that way? Transactional? In my experience there is a whole range of people when it comes to how much money matters to them, and seeing it as black and white is really limiting your options.
You remember back in high school or college, there was that group of friends that you always hung out with, you saw eye to eye with, you knew them, they knew you, you’d get a phone call at 2 in the morning, one of them is beside the road with a flat tire and you’re who they called, so of course you go help? Like they don’t ask because it’s not a question, it’s what you do, you’d do it for them, they’d do it for you?
First they stop texting you first but they’ll reply when you text them. Then they stop replying. Then you stop reaching out. Then you delete their number. Then you get a text “Hey you still drive that truck?” By my mid-20’s, there were none left.
Few mechanisms exist to meet new people beyond college, few people ever exchange contact details, of those that do, few answer the first time. I live in a town, lots of people live next door, across the street, down the block. None have introduced themselves.
Oh and “romances.” So called. After the college sowing oats phase, in my actual adulthood, the one-night stands and short term flings were always 100% healthier than any attempt at long term romantic relationships. Communication…happened. “Here’s what I expect, here’s how long I want this to last, here are my deal breakers,” etc. I will trade you one licked clitoris for one sucked penis. Deal, who goes first? Both simultaneously? No i prefer to be on my back. Okay, I’ll do you then you do me. Great, let’s go. That right there is 100% transactional, you could write it as a legal contract with consideration, terms and conditions. Anyone where you’d change your relationship status on Facebook for? No can’t have that; that’s beneath them. What ensues is 4 months of we go out on whatever dates I can come up with, ball is always in my court, she never knows what she wants, we have plenty of sex, but I almost always initiate, then about 2 months of vetos, shorter answers and "not tonight"s, then a week of “I hate that place” and “that’s all you think about” and then it’s done. She apparently wanted something from me, she was not willing to directly tell me what it was, preferring instead to see if she could get it by pretending to be my #1 groupie for a few months and then getting very resentful and angry when that didn’t work. I’m not trying that again.
Do I personally view relationships as “transactional?” Yes, by derivation from first principles. Ask the question “Just what the fuck are relationships even for, anyway?” And the stock answer is “humans are highly social animals and they require interactions with other humans for their mental health” and, like, the very basic concept of a “relationship” is the mutual fulfilling of that need. “I will trade you one ‘you heard someone’s voice today say something not about work’, in exchange for one ‘I heard someone’s voice today say something not about work’.”
My first thought on writing that was “21st century wedding vows if ever I heard them.” I was once broken up with for saying “I think I need to go to the dentist” so “to have and to hold in sickness and in health” is apparently out of the question.