RAG Party this Sat 10th Nov (3 Viewers)

[Corm]

problems i've had with male sexual behaviour:

sense of entitlement to intercourse

At what point? When you first meet?

selfishness with regard to orgasm

That's as easily applied to women as it is to men.

irritating objectification (aka grabbing, sense of ownership of woman)

Again, is this with people you've gone out with, or the common-or-garden "man off the street"? I've had the same problem with women, actually it's been the most common thing that's made me finish at an early stage with people that I've otherwise liked.

patronising attitude to concerns of woman - e.g. you don't want to do what i want, therefore you're repressed/boring/unadventurous (aka i'm annoyed you won't let me ride you up the arse).)

I think this is more about unfortunate choice of sexual partner than about "men". With both men and women I've been with, some have been extraordinarily boring, unadventurous, rediculously self-conscious & cluelessly selfish, and others (a lot less) have been absolutely mind-blowing, amazingly conscious of my needs aswell as their own, fantastically uninhibited and astoundingly attuned to the fact that it's a two way thing.

The other thing is, that women are very very different than men when it comes to orgasm. Some girls, you could spend all night with them and they'll either get nowhere or be on the edge for hours. Others, they'll come 3, 4, 5, sometimes a dozen or more times. It's about finding the right partner, whoever fits right with your body and your expression and gets you off, there's no "rules" other than just be clear with people about what you want & what you don't want. And if they don't respect that, leave.

 

[nooleen]

At what point? When you first meet?

no, throughout. women are much more governed by mood when it comes to sex whereas men tend to just want it whenever the wee lad wakes up.

That's as easily applied to women as it is to men.

jesus!! hardly. are you joking?

Again, is this with people you've gone out with, or the common-or-garden "man off the street"? I've had the same problem with women, actually it's been the most common thing that's made me finish at an early stage with people that I've otherwise liked.

this is almost anybody i've ever been with - this sense of entitlement to grab at your body once you've slept with someone - i'm not talking about possessiveness, i'm talking about physical invasion of space. insensitivity to your actual mood and obsession with your function as a sexual object.

I think this is more about unfortunate choice of sexual partner than about "men".

HA. no.

 

[wageslave]

However, I'd disagree under the strongest possible terms that RAG is an anarchist organisation for the simple fact that it is unwelcoming to men and that this discrimination is a crucial part of the collective's identity.

eh? Do you mean that you think there can't be a women only anarchist group? Or do mean more by 'unwelcoming'?

 

[the strange guy]

Of course I meant I can't get my head around a female anarchist group rather than seeing the irony of an anarchist group choosing its applicants based on gender regardless of interest, passion or capability.

But as I said, it ain't my decision to make and I don't want to join them. I can't join Stormfront either but I'm not too upset about it.

 

[nooleen]

I think this is more about unfortunate choice of sexual partner than about "men".

it would be a very lovely world if there was a host of sensitive, skillful potential partners out there for everyone. it's a pretty weak cop-out to write off what is pretty widespread sexual disilliusionment amongst women as 'poor choice of lover'. where are all these ground-shaking partners we've been missing out on?

 

[Janer]

The other thing is, that women are very very different than men when it comes to orgasm. Some girls, you could spend all night with them and they'll either get nowhere or be on the edge for hours. Others, they'll come 3, 4, 5, sometimes a dozen or more times.

This is true.

 

[broken arm]

no, throughout. women are much more governed by mood when it comes to sex whereas men tend to just want it whenever the wee lad wakes up.

are you trying to be insulting/patronising for the buzz?

p.s. i'm not insulted.

 

[Janer]

Are u man or woman?.....broken too bloody long arm.

 

[nooleen]

are you trying to be insulting/patronising for the buzz?
p.s. i'm not insulted.

what are you talking about? what part of that do you take exception to? do you think that men don't want to have sex when their cocks are hard? i really don't understand what point you're trying to make.

 

[Janer]

Mmmm Nooly lets reverse the question maybe......when you see a hard mans cock Do you want sex?

 

[broken arm]

what are you talking about? what part of that do you take exception to? do you think that men don't want to have sex when their cocks are hard? i really don't understand what point you're trying to make.

I don't take exception to anything....

but your sentence was funny - along the lines of "men have small penises, no emotions and all they think about is sex"

i'm fine with that.

and so is Janer

 

[Janer]

It's what you do with it but..........
but

















































but?








Si?

 

[nooleen]

your sentence was funny - along the lines of "men have small penises, no emotions and all they think about is sex"

???
bizarre.

 

[mazzyianne]

I think the only reason to bring out a male-only zine would be as a tit-for-tat response to RAG. I think the fellas most rabidly against the women-only formula would never write for the zine anyway, with maybe one or two exceptions. The most important thing is - if you don't like it, don't buy it, don't support it and start your own. However, I'd disagree under the strongest possible terms that RAG is an anarchist organisation for the simple fact that it is unwelcoming to men and that this discrimination is a crucial part of the collective's identity.

I can sum up 21st century life as a guy in the Western world for you - it's grand; it has its ups and downs, its benefits and its shortfalls. I appreciate life for women is different. I don't think there's a need for a zine collective to explore male issues because I don't think it's something male readers would find essential reading. If it was an appealing read to women then they'd be misled by the articles simply because most men would be nothing like the little emo-boy who wrote it!

I think there's a gender (as well as genital) fixation in many circles. Should the word 'Cunt' be reclaimed or banned? Meh. All of this (zines, collectives, support groups) can be empowering to many and seen as absolute guff to others. Whatever floats their boat I suppose.

If you're the type of guy who worries about appearing too macho or feel the need to apologise to women for this sexist world you have no part of then need to lop it off, no question about it. I have no reason to feel guilty about my penis, no need to feel guilty for the doors it opens, no need to feel guilty of the history behind the penis nor to apologise for what anyone else's penis has done or has made them do. A male-only zine that explores these issues will be hilarious in the same way that a feminist magazine which explores the same issues can only be as serious as the Holocaust.

I disagree with almost all of this post...
There is a men's group starting in seomra spraoi by men who are completely supportive of the need for rag to be women only. If they wrote a magazine I agree with Jane it would be deadly and would make facinating reading and would have nothing to do with tit for tats.

I dont see what feeling guilty has to do with anything, no one's asking anyone to feel guilty.

The is absolutely nothing un-anarchist about being women-only! why would you think that? It's about creating equality basicaly and as people who believe that women are not treated equally to men we believe that women should organise together to fight for equality.
Most anarchist theorists talk about the need for the workers to come together to rise up against the bosses or whatever, and how important it is for the people who experience oppression to identify it and fight against it. Usually they didn't apply this to women because most of them didn't write about equality for women, but it applies. The problem is that it's a much less straightforward situation because it's so different from the worker/boss relationship, this is about close relatioships, husbands and wives, lovers, friends etc. as we can see from the discussion here. Also different women have different amounts of power and the control and oppression is far more subtle and difficult to see from close uo. It's only when you step back and look at the % of land owned by women (10), of women who are in the dail (13), of women who experience sexual assault, domestic abouse, of unpaid work done by women.
All this shit needs to be explored by anarchists, men and women if we want to create an equal society. But the fact remains that women speak less at meetings and need sto be the ones to explore and express the way things are.
For example in the beginnings of the feminist movement, lots of rich white women sat around saying 'this is what it means to be a women.. blah blah'.
But they couldn't speak for poor women, black women. Similarly men cant speak for women.
Anyway, I wrote an article about it in the first issue (and kind of in the second too) so I'll shut up now.
Sorry for the rant

 

[nooleen]

Mmmm Nooly lets reverse the question maybe......when you see a hard mans cock Do you want sex?

that's not reversing the question. that's still basing sex around the man's arousal.

 

[Shine]

I don't know anyone who sees RAG as a 'borglike' entity but many people found it segregationist to exclude male contributors, especially because this is an anarchist group. I don't know if that policy has changed.

just to clarify - all "contributors" are excluded - except those women who are part of RAG (who discuss and workshop ideas/ take part in the process of editing articles, organising events and putting together and distributing a magazine) RAG is open to female anarchists only to make it easier to discuss and work together on the issues on which we have a common ground - by virtue or our gender presentation.

we have discussed getting a contributors page together on our website - and if enough interest is generated, we could perhaps collate contributions in printed format. i don't see any reason why these would be limited to contributions from females.

likewise, we welcome men getting involved and helping out with events and taking part in our open discussions.

we also try to remain aware that some people are not comfortable with the idea of separate sex environments. and we realise that however useful this environment is for bringing us out and allowing us to discuss issues that mean a lot to us, an analysis remains incomplete until brought to the community at large. ie you lot.

However, I'd disagree under the strongest possible terms that RAG is an anarchist organisation for the simple fact that it is unwelcoming to men and that this discrimination is a crucial part of the collective's identity.

what a weird cross-purposes statement. my brain is tied up in knots with it.. is this questioning the validity of our existance - or is it just semantics?
we are a collection of anarchist women, who wish to work through issues that affect us as women, with other women. we are a publishing collective. we never set out to be some kind of broad anarchist organisation, we are some anarchists who chose how we wished to organise. and it's worked pretty well so far.

we are totally welcoming to men. we just recognise the need to organise seperately. and have this discussion forever. fuxxake.

anyway - back to the sex...


edit> just reread this - there's a lot of we-ing and us-ing- even though i can't really speak for the other members of the collective but u get the idea - mazzyanne prob says it better above!

 

[Janer]

There is a men's group starting in seomra spraoi by men who are completely supportive of the need for rag to be women only.

You sure these are actually real men and not artificially created men such as Dunchee and Brian Cufflink?

Just asking like/

 

[Janer]

We don't trust men

Fair enough love.

 

[mazzyianne]

It's not like women are incapable of being sexually manipulative. I'm sure Nooly's not saying that.
I've had some really cool conversations with men about sex in the last few years. One guy was talking to me about the pressure he feels and has felt towards thinking of being with someone as being all about sex. Like when he was in school that was all they would talk about and he's had to rethink it only now (in his 30s).
For women it's not like that.
I think socialisation has a massive impact on people's behaviour and it cant be written off as a major inpact on how we act is these situations.

 

[ITalkShite]

This thread would make a fantastic radio play