How To Remove Candle Wax from A Mobile Phone

[KenHigg]

I don't follow what the link had to do with our discusion...but in trying to get a quick look at the author's reasoning and something seemed odd:

The gendered classification of social reality is all-pervasive but at its most profound in dictating how we experience sexual desire. In her book, The Lenses of Gender (Yale University Press), Bem argues that polarization mistakenly lumps all men together and all women together, obliterating the true diversity of impulses that "naturally exists within each sex and the overlap that naturally exists between the two sexes." Among them: erotic interest in people of both sexes, the wish to don vibrant colors and silky textures, feelings of nurturance toward a child.

If I wanted to exaimine something existed "within each sex and the overlap that naturally exists between the two sexes.", wouldn't I want to lump the information on men in one group and then likewise with the women?
Then maybe put it all together??

What'd I miss?

 

[Rich]

This man, during sex, might enjoy being anally stimulated by his wife

So might a great deal of ordinary men

 

[cheuschober]

Whatever...

Just seemed a bit arrogant, even for you, to proclaim that you're more sexually secure that most others because you have more gay friends and that you wear a pink shirt without thinking twice...

I don't think I ever said 'because I have more gay friends' because that clearly has nothing to do with sexual security but the fact that I'm not driven 'away from' gays indicates that my own sexual orientation isn't under the threat of influence from an outside source, which is to say, I am secure.

The same can be said for taking interest in things that have long since fallen to the way side of 'male taboo' such as a manicure or wearing a bright color. This gruff idealist 'southern man' you speak of is limited by his insecurity in that he can't go get a nice pedicure or wax his chest because of his own fear of being percieved as having an alternate sexual orientation.

Oi! Where's Idjit when I need that preschooler!?! I cannot stress enough that you are presenting the EXACT classical case for male sexual insecurity. It is in the same vein of psychological motivation as buying a ridiculously expensive sports car because your penis is tiny.

I Googled Freud and metrosexual and didn't get any hits. Even tried Frued and pink shirt, chestwaxing, etc... Nothing. So I'm assuming his work in those areas are limited.

Metrosexual is not a phsychology term. It's a buzz word that is used to sub-classify straight males who basically reject one of the tenents of insecurity found in the overwhelming male population. I think you need to look into ego, superego, masculinity, insecurity, egocentricity, etc. This argument has little to do with pink shirts and chest waxing and you damn well know it.

~Chad

 

[cheuschober]

So might a great deal of ordinary men

Umm... that's what I was trying to say -- this fellow IS an ordinary man who happens to have a stronger feminine sexual gender identity than others. Doesn't make him a woman in the mind.

~chad

 

[cheuschober]

Gender polarization also becomes the single most important dimension around which personality and individual identity is organized. But by expanding the meaning of what it is to be male or female beyond the biological, it generates deep insecurity about one's maleness or femaleness. It becomes something that must constantly be worked on, protected from loss.

So one has to begin to imagine what is 'loss.' Since the need to protect 'maleness' is the definition of insecurity, what must it be protected from? Your individuals who want to 'get away' from homosexuality are protecting themselves from it -- the definition of insecurity.

This burden falls disproportionately on men, since androcentrism devalues feelings or behaviors culturally defined as female and punishes men who have them.

This is the source of the stigmata against pink or what you might try to call 'homosexual behavior.'

So they wind up becoming gender caricatures and homophobes, deeming homosexual impulses unnatural and abhorrent because they so threaten the shaky enterprise of male identity.

Your gruff southern man is an example of the gender caricature/homophobe.

Not everyone accepts the "presumed naturalness of the link between the sex of the body and the gender of the psyche," however. There are "gender subversives," primarily homosexuals, who manage to escape the distorting lenses of the culture. If Bem is right, they are the leaders of a necessary psychological revolution.

Notice 'primarily homosexuals.' The homosexuals already started that necessary psychological revolution. Metrosexuals are one of the results of that revolution -- men brave enough to escape cultural stigma. It's completely and utterly impossible so long as the insecurity binds one to the caricatures described above.

--------
But Ken, keep in mind that not everyone who is a gruff country boy is submitting themselves to carciature! IOW, I'm not calling you a closet case! But if your masculinity IS threatened by being in the company of a homosexual community or taking actions (like waxing a chest) that are considered 'homosexual' then I have every right to cry 'Insecure!' And plenty of metro's are insecure in plenty of other ways. This is just one microcosm example.

If you don't want to wax your chest then don't! But don't stop because of what the guys at the office would think. Do it for your own reason--like how you enjoy braiding it.

~Chad

 

[KenHigg]

I don't think I ever said 'because I have more gay friends' because that clearly has nothing to do with sexual security but the fact that I'm not driven 'away from' gays indicates that my own sexual orientation isn't under the threat of influence from an outside source, which is to say, I am secure.

Seems to me that if you aren't driven away froms gays a much as the next guy, then you'd have more gay friends.

The same can be said for taking interest in things that have long since fallen to the way side of 'male taboo' such as a manicure or wearing a bright color. This gruff idealist 'southern man' you speak of is limited by his insecurity in that he can't go get a nice pedicure or wax his chest because of his own fear of being percieved as having an alternate sexual orientation.

In my opinion, we all have a limit, we just elect to draw our lines in the sand in different places. One guy don't do pink shirts, the other guy may not wear a thong to the beach... Even you have displayed a degree of what you label as insecurity by being prompt and clear on correcting me that you were not, in fact contemplating a gay lifestyle.

Oi! Where's Idjit when I need that preschooler!?! I cannot stress enough that you are presenting the EXACT classical case for male sexual insecurity. It is in the same vein of psychological motivation as buying a ridiculously expensive sports car because your penis is tiny.

So you're saying I have this psychological condition?

Metrosexual is not a phsychology term. It's a buzz word that is used to sub-classify straight males who basically reject one of the tenents of insecurity found in the overwhelming male population. I think you need to look into ego, superego, masculinity, insecurity, egocentricity, etc. This argument has little to do with pink shirts and chest waxing and you damn well know it.
~Chad

uh... That was kind of a pun. Sorry...

 

[Rich]

Umm... that's what I was trying to say -- this fellow IS an ordinary man who happens to have a stronger feminine sexual gender identity than others. Doesn't make him a woman in the mind.

~chad

So in other words metrosexuality is the new buzz word for effeminacy?
I don't see how a male enjoying anal stimulation makes him feminine

 

[Groundrush]

I don't see how a male enjoying anal stimulation makes him feminine

...

What happend to my thread......

 

[KenHigg]

Sorry guys, you can have it back... Chad's beating me up pretty good anyway!

 

[cheuschober]

So in other words metrosexuality is the new buzz word for effeminacy?
I don't see how a male enjoying anal stimulation makes him feminine

Femininity and having a more feminine gender polarization are different concepts. In phsychological terms maleness is active while femine is passive (which again need be careful semantic ground to be tread upon -- this doesn't mean females are passive but a 'feminine trait' is simply a term a trait that is passive). This is more easly simplified into mechanical terms -- the male and the feminine coupling of two mechanical parts. The female part is the recipient of the male part. A man who likes having anything be it a finger or a dildo or a football up his rear has a stronger gender polarization towards femininity in sex than a man who does not.

Oi. I can't stress enough to all y'all how the world of psychological semantics does not intersect your everyday broad ideas of these words. Gender polarization of the mind towards femininity in one aspect does not mean you're going to go walk around with a limp wrist!

~Chad

 

[cheuschober]

Seems to me that if you aren't driven away froms gays a much as the next guy, then you'd have more gay friends.

Attraction and friendship are not equivalent, Ken. Everyone you are not 'driven away' from would then, by your reasoning, be your friend and everyone who is not your friend you would be 'driven away.' Your argument doesn't hold water.

In my opinion, we all have a limit, we just elect to draw our lines in the sand in different places. One guy don't do pink shirts, the other guy may not wear a thong to the beach... Even you have displayed a degree of what you label as insecurity by being prompt and clear on correcting me that you were not, in fact contemplating a gay lifestyle.

I'm not saying that I don't have my own insecurities, everyone does. But the whole point of this argument is to say that a metrosexual male is on average more secure in sexuality than a non-metrosexual male. The reasoning behind this has been given time and time again. Yes, each person has their 'line in the sand' but the motivation for drawing that line is what determines whether or not it plays into the argument.

I have long beheld that if pink isn't your color because it doesn't look good on you or you had some childhood traumatic experience with a pink elephant or ANY OTHER REASON than the supposed 'homosexuality or effiminacy' of the clothing then it's not an issue. If you don't want to wear a thong at the beach because you find having a string up your a** uncomfortable then I can say - so do I and agree with you. It's not the in/action that concerns me as much as the motivation for the in/action.

However, I will contest you that I have displayed any kind of insecurity in simply correcting you from making an assumption that was leading you to draw inappropriate conclusions. Moreso, the fact that you continue to insist that it is a lifestyle instead of proven genetic predispositioning belies a scientific ignorance that I have taken upon myself to correct you of whenever possible. The swiftness of my reply has little to nothing to do with my level of 'security,' and has everything to do with cauterizing the wound before it bleeds too long. As for clear, I have found that I must be crystal when having such discussions with you as you will spin and run anything you can get your grubby little hands on.... like any good debater...

So you're saying I have this psychological condition?

No Ken. I don't make assumptions about other people, at least I try not to, and when I do, I certainly don't want to make a statement (IE KenHigg is 'blah'). I don't claim to know all your motivations because I'm not inside your head. Do I have suspicions ? Certainly. Much of your dialogue thus far has indicated a severe fear of homosexuality. Fear of that is strongly indicative of an insecurity in ones own sexuality. That is not to say I suspect you are gay. Insecurities stem from all sorts of regions from physical characteristics to marital environments all the way down to simple depression. But my suspicions aside, it's not my place to play shrink so I won't attempt to label you as a typically insecure male. Only you have control of why you do what you do.

uh... That was kind of a pun. Sorry...

Ahh... sorry in turn for biting your head off about it!

~Chad

 

[cheuschober]

Sorry guys, you can have it back... Chad's beating me up pretty good anyway!

*cracks his knuckles*

Who wants some? I'm king of this mountain now!! Mmmwhahaha!
~Chad

 

[Rich]

A man who likes having anything be it a finger or a dildo or a football up his rear has a stronger gender polarization towards femininity in sex than a man who does not.


~Chad

Claptrap, a man who likes having his chest waxed is either a fetishist or effeminate

 

[Rich]

...

What happend to my thread......

Well you did bring up the subject of dripping hot candle wax

 

[Groundrush]

Well you did bring up the subject of dripping hot candle wax

Ahem....not sure if it's important or not but I have just found some wax on our sofa in the living room that we missed on our first inspection...

 

[Groundrush]

Are you sure you missed it on the first inspection? There are several other explanations as to why it's there now!

Ok enlighten me!

As I mentioned earlier in the post, all I remember is going for a nice romantic meal then waking up the next morning with candle wax everwhere...

Next year my mother is not getting the door key, the house will probably burn down at the rate were going.....

Ok... I know I'm going to regret asking this - But what is your official street definition of a 'metrosexual'?

We'll Ken, do you regret asking?.....

 

[KenHigg]

... Much of your dialogue thus far has indicated a severe fear of homosexuality. Fear of that is strongly indicative of an insecurity in ones own sexuality.

You're delusional. I have no more of a fear of homosexuals than you have a fear of say, I don't know... Catholics? You seem to disagree with their lifestyle. Or does that make you spiritually insecure?

We'll Ken, do you regret asking?.....

Nah, It was pretty good dialog for a while...

(Anyone know where I can get a good deal on a Countach? )

 

[cheuschober]

You're delusional. I have no more of a fear of homosexuals than you have a fear of say, I don't know... Catholics? You seem to disagree with their lifestyle. Or does that make you spiritually insecure?

Then why are you so insistent on your need to 'get away' from gays or 'gay culture' ?

Seems to me that if you aren't driven away froms gays a much as the next guy, then you'd have more gay friends.

You have openly admitted in multiple posts across multiple threads how you don't want the 'gay lifestyle' around you. If you were completely secure, Ken, then why would it matter at all whether it was or was not near your proximity. In other words, you would not feel threatened. Homosexuality challenges the gender caricature you have idolized. For whatever deep-seated, unknowing reason you have, it clearly has the power to affect you to the point of lashing out at people in an attempt to drive it away.

But, I digress. I've said this all before and I'm not going to bother repeating it over and over. If you want to continue idolizing your gender caricature and being under the constant threat of a 'gay lifestyle' invasion, worry not, millions of American men have paved the way and life turned out just fine for them.

As for my own insecurities - yes, I certainly have them. Specifically my greed. I had a set of Catholics offer me $150 000 if I'd just 'return to the church to save my soul.' So I got away from that. Because I am greedy because I know what its like to be poor and I didn't want my own financial insecurity to motivate my decisions in life especially one as important as a spiritual decision.

But, in any case, attempting to call up an unreleated subject is low--it's nothing more than a diversion that you need. Like trying to say my view was skewed because of relationships I may or may not have with members of the homosexual community. I'm presenting a solid scientifically backed argument. You present 'personal thesis' and smoke and mirrors. At some point, however, I can't continue to restate these things. At some point I have to just let you go off believing what you want to believe. That's your right, and part of your defense mechanism -- the final feral charge to make sure the invading creature doesn't return all while beating your chest and proclaiming your 'masculinity' to the world.

So take that for what you will. This is my last post on this thread. Your insecurities and prejudices have been shown to me and are visible to any other individual with enough self-security to not be threated by the arguments presented. Those who share the same insecurities, those like yourself, won't see it. And that's fine, I guess. There is some small truth to the idea that if you wake up and tell yourself you're happy and safe every morning, that you'll begin to believe it.

Regards,
~Chad

 

[ColinEssex]

I think all this psychological claptrap is a load of bo**ocks!

Anyone male wanting to wear a pink outfit out just to "buck the trend" must be deficient in the brain cell dept, or like being beaten up, or be effeminate. Likewise any male waxing their chest just to "look good and feel good" must also have something of an Adonis fettish - they think they're gods gift to women (and men) - anyway plenty of females hate smooth male skin and prefer the unwaxed version. I've seen plenty of young males strutting about like peacocks in town on an evening thinking they are the dogs bo**ocks little realising what total prats they look.
People who spend hours thinking about and analysing all this need to get a bloody life, most of us have too many other more important things to worry about.

BTW it wasn't James Dean who brought the leather jacket to popularity, it was Marlon Brando in On The Waterfront. I wear a leather jacket on my motorbike for safety reasons as do many bikers.

Other examples of pop star fashion picked up by the populace include

Beatle Jackets (with no collar)
Beatle Boots
Mini skirt - various 60's female singers + fashion designer Mary Quant of course.
Dave Clark roll neck shirt
Punk - various bands from the 70's

Col

 

[ColinEssex]

Now if I adopt this person's reasoning:

You don't really have a motorbike for transportation purposes, you have it so that you can wear a leather jacket and hang out at the pub with a load of other guys who are presumed to be gay, because they like hanging around in groups of blokes!

I can just imagine saying to my friends "do you like my pink outfit? oh by the way, does anybody else chest-wax?" - bloody 'ell - I'd be lynched

Wonder what people would think of George Bush if he wore a pink outfit to "buck the trend"? heaven forbid, people would think he's a joke

I see the British are sending 5000 troops to Afghanistan to help out the Yanks who can't seem to manage on their own.

Col