The tragedy of himbo death (hexbear.net)

submitted 3 months ago by RNAi@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

143 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 18 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Thank you for your response.

"taking it slow"

You're the second person quoting something that's I don't see present in the text and I feel like I'm missing something here.

the 'hookup' is supposed to be ephemeral and shallow.

I understand the concept of thinking a hook-up is shallow and, as I've said elsewhere, if that was what was said, then that would have been a compliment. What was said though wasn't "I could never just have X with you, I'd need to have y!" <- that would have been a compliment.

think this is very enmeshed in patriarchal norms with people trying to recreate a more old fashioned courtship.

I gotta be honest, it strikes me as some toxic masculinity thing where we expect a lot of things of men wrt feelings and social interactions. then punish them when they dont fulfill it. Women are also capable of saying insensitive stuff and it seems to me like we're pretending the interpretation of it being rude isn't valid, because it's a guy who has it and when men are sad they are wrong.
There's plenty of people just in this thread chiming in with how they would interpret it the same way, so it's not like it's some far fetched thing.

i mean wanting your partner to think you're adonis is weird patriarchy too.

But that's also not what is being expressed as a wish. The guy is sad because his partner said she isn't sexually attracted to him. It is very normal to want your partner to be attracted to you. Sexual attraction isn't purely based on aesthetics, and I know a few people who would find constanza hot.

[-] Dolores@hexbear.net 6 points 3 months ago

it took me long enough to type that up that i missed most of the discussion, lol sorry for addressing things other people brought up

however you're being a bit too rigid in your interpretation of the text. we don't have a quote, just an explanation from one party of what they said. we're all just extrapolating on delivery/timing/vocabulary that was used so we can't actually litigate this particular situation with accuracy. but it's a vehicle to talk about relationships and patriarchy and we love to do that don't we folks

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 15 points 3 months ago

it took me long enough to type that up that i missed most of the discussion, lol sorry for addressing things other people brought up.

No worries!

however you're being a bit too rigid in your interpretation of the text. we don't have a quote, just an explanation from one party of what they said.

I agree, but I do this on purpose because we only have the text and people keep adding things that aren't in the text, which is why we end up misunderstanding each other.
My rigidity also comes from the feeling that my interpretation is treated as though it isn't valid, which is very frustrating, especially when I do not disagree on the validity of the positive interpretation, just that it is not the only one. To me it is the people who insist on the positive interpretation that are being rigid, since I do not see them admitting the other way is possible, but instead just some man being silly.