Stalked!
- Thread starter martin
- Start date
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
LOL, er, yes, er, kinda
hundredmillionlifetimes
Banned
Just this one? Optimism aside, such parasitic threads do serve to highlight and remind of the pervasive psychopathology and cultural desperation of contemporary fetishes, especially among white males.
As if we need reminding ...
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
And I really, really disagree with that. I can see where you're coming from with it, but you can definitely make an effort to fancy someone, it's like wishing and it comes true. Fancying isn't just this immediate love at first sight thing all the time.
Brief digression about stalking:
The closest I've ever come to a situation like this was a couple of summers ago. Met a girl, she was probably more into me than I was, but I thought she was swell. Thing was, it was a fortnight before I'd go to university in a different country, so I made it clear that much as I'd like to, no real relationship was going to come from our affections. She seemed fine with that, we slept together, and from that point on things went a bit nuts. She'd frequently text and ring me with sexual prepositions, and when I'd tell her I was doing something else, she'd turn up there half an hour later. If I didn't reply, she'd find out from my friends where I was. Things came to a climax when I was meeting a friend at a well-known, very large London park (I know there's no need to be discreet, but I feel as if I should!), and she managed to find me there, presumably after hours of searching. I bluntly told her I didn't want to see her (I hadn't had the balls before), and felt awful about it.
Thing is, she was a perfectly nice girl. Just a bit screwy. She actually told me some stuff from her past that relate to other issues discussed in this thread that she apparently hadn't told anybody before, which would explain it. But yeah, nothing as interesting as Italian shoe-sculpters unfortunately.
The closest I've ever come to a situation like this was a couple of summers ago. Met a girl, she was probably more into me than I was, but I thought she was swell. Thing was, it was a fortnight before I'd go to university in a different country, so I made it clear that much as I'd like to, no real relationship was going to come from our affections. She seemed fine with that, we slept together, and from that point on things went a bit nuts. She'd frequently text and ring me with sexual prepositions, and when I'd tell her I was doing something else, she'd turn up there half an hour later. If I didn't reply, she'd find out from my friends where I was. Things came to a climax when I was meeting a friend at a well-known, very large London park (I know there's no need to be discreet, but I feel as if I should!), and she managed to find me there, presumably after hours of searching. I bluntly told her I didn't want to see her (I hadn't had the balls before), and felt awful about it.
Thing is, she was a perfectly nice girl. Just a bit screwy. She actually told me some stuff from her past that relate to other issues discussed in this thread that she apparently hadn't told anybody before, which would explain it. But yeah, nothing as interesting as Italian shoe-sculpters unfortunately.
hundredmillionlifetimes
Banned
Yes, it takes a lot of work (conscious and unconscious), just as disavowing it also does. Mr T prefers instead to be and remain mystified, which presumably is why he likes to drink tea.
Guybrush
Dittohead
Hey, what happened to your dog-with-man-in-puddle picture, tht? It was very illustrative.
Time for a stalking 101, then! I feel terribly blasé at the moment, it’s almost like I’ve lost the ability to really fancy someone of the opposite sex—for good and for bad, but mostly for shame. (Sorry for the digression, I promise to address the thread’s topic tomorrow.)
Time for a stalking 101, then! I feel terribly blasé at the moment, it’s almost like I’ve lost the ability to really fancy someone of the opposite sex—for good and for bad, but mostly for shame. (Sorry for the digression, I promise to address the thread’s topic tomorrow.)
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
What? I mean, what what what what? I happen to be attracted to human females, as horrendously clichéd as that may be. Your preference seems to be for wanking over thesauruses or sociology textbooks. Please advise, yours, Confused.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Utter rubbish. Some people are fit, some people are minging, most people are somewhere in between. That's just the way it is.
Yes, you can try to make the effort to find someone attractive, and if that works, then that's great for you. But that's not generally how it works. It just isn't.
hundredmillionlifetimes
Banned
What? I mean, what what what what? I happen to be attracted to human females, as horrendously clichéd as that may be. Your preference seems to be for wanking over thesauruses or sociology textbooks. Please advise, yours, Confused.
Advise? Well, yes: stop projecting your [unexamined] sexual frustrations [your stated displaced desire for "wanking over thesauruses or sociology textbooks"] onto some unknown Other who happens to draw attention to, to label, some of the obsessions articulated on this thread as fetishes.
N
nomadologist
Guest
Nope, STN, though that was a good guess. It was Naomi Wolf:
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/trends/n_9437/index.html
hundredmillionlifetimes
Banned
... while dishonest people find thesauruses less attractive than sociology textbooks, as they genuinely reserve their wanking for a more decent, intelligent vocabulary.
N
nomadologist
Guest
And what good did you imagine would come of someone starting a thread about being stalked and how much fun it is to get sexual attention, even if it's from someone who's seriously unstable?
I keep forgetting: message boards are the height of all discourse. We should really expect a bunch of strangers posting in a consequence-free enviroment to keep it at Ivory Tower level constantly. *eye roll*
hundredmillionlifetimes
Banned
Maybe if we imagine that it's the "to someone" and not just the "from someone" who's etc ...
N
nomadologist
Guest
I'm not quite sure what you mean, Hundredmillion. But I'm hoping you're indicating that you partially understand my annoyance here.
The central reductionist fallacy I hear severely heteronormatively straight males cite over and over is that sexuality is all biological and somehow "above" or "below" the influence of psycho-social factors in its formation. They will insist that something like, say, breast implants work because men just can't help loving big breasts because biologically men are "wired" to be hopelessly attracted to the biggest, most unnaturally large-looking breasts imaginable. This is always with no reference to the fetishitic nature of sexuality in general, let alone the obvious fetishism inherent in so many of our cartoonishly ridiculous post-secondary exaggerations of secondary sex characteristics in our sexual imagery. There's never any acknowledgement that biologically, disproportionately large breasts would actually indicate an elevated risk of heart disease at very least, and a lot of things that aren't necessarily genetically desirable at worst. I can't stand reductionism w/r/t sexuality, coming from anyone.
The same straight men who adhere most strictly to this usually cling hardest to the idea that women somehow aren't as biologically sexual as men. You know the drill. Virgins/whores. There's the mom figure (and her replacement, the "wifey" girlfriend), then the sex toys that appear in magazines and DVDs at their whim for their complete silent unchallenged unreciprocal gratification. The ones who think it's absolutely disgusting to see men in a speedo (in America, at least) or absolutely biologically wrong for men to preen, while it's perfectly natural and obviously aesthetically favorable for women to be seen as a bunch of parts. It's perfectly natural for female worth to be measured in units based on how desperately men want to see her in a bikini. They're also the jealous types who think they own you if they've touched you, and get upset at the thought that you've had previous lovers. It's all exhaustingly boring-to-repulsive for women, who end up only seeking male attention out of neurotic desperation to feel "worthy" of it.
Like that Courtney Love song, "I am/doll parts." hehe. My friend with PTSD loves Courtney Love, which makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?
The central reductionist fallacy I hear severely heteronormatively straight males cite over and over is that sexuality is all biological and somehow "above" or "below" the influence of psycho-social factors in its formation. They will insist that something like, say, breast implants work because men just can't help loving big breasts because biologically men are "wired" to be hopelessly attracted to the biggest, most unnaturally large-looking breasts imaginable. This is always with no reference to the fetishitic nature of sexuality in general, let alone the obvious fetishism inherent in so many of our cartoonishly ridiculous post-secondary exaggerations of secondary sex characteristics in our sexual imagery. There's never any acknowledgement that biologically, disproportionately large breasts would actually indicate an elevated risk of heart disease at very least, and a lot of things that aren't necessarily genetically desirable at worst. I can't stand reductionism w/r/t sexuality, coming from anyone.
The same straight men who adhere most strictly to this usually cling hardest to the idea that women somehow aren't as biologically sexual as men. You know the drill. Virgins/whores. There's the mom figure (and her replacement, the "wifey" girlfriend), then the sex toys that appear in magazines and DVDs at their whim for their complete silent unchallenged unreciprocal gratification. The ones who think it's absolutely disgusting to see men in a speedo (in America, at least) or absolutely biologically wrong for men to preen, while it's perfectly natural and obviously aesthetically favorable for women to be seen as a bunch of parts. It's perfectly natural for female worth to be measured in units based on how desperately men want to see her in a bikini. They're also the jealous types who think they own you if they've touched you, and get upset at the thought that you've had previous lovers. It's all exhaustingly boring-to-repulsive for women, who end up only seeking male attention out of neurotic desperation to feel "worthy" of it.
Like that Courtney Love song, "I am/doll parts." hehe. My friend with PTSD loves Courtney Love, which makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?
mistersloane
heavy heavy monster sound
I'm a slag, OK? And I defend slags and their slagdom and all the slags that have ever lived. I think it's honourable and does society a service and in fact have a Jewish friend who just came back from Israel who went over there and slept with lots of Palestinian soldiers to do her bit for the cause.
I think it's not fucking rather than fucking that displaces and causes problems in society, and in fact think that stalking comes from precisely the "oh my god, they're perfect, they're the one for me" type of thinking, rather than thinking 'oh well" and then going and chatting to the person at the bus-stop because the way they tie the laces on their trainers is kinda suave.
I'm not saying I don't know what you mean - attraction at first sight is common, or not - depending on HOW FUSSY you are, but like nomad says, fetishes get around all sorts of problems with attractiveness. ( paraphrase ).
"It's absolutely disgusting to see men in a speedo". Fraid I have to agree with that, they are gross and should be banned under international law.
And god bless Courtney, and all who sail upon her.