4 ms·

The summary is unnecessary, the entire story is in that post and includes stuff like: I stop suddenly and I say to her, “You… are worse than a WHORE!” It's pr

The summary is unnecessary, the entire story is in that post and includes stuff like: I stop suddenly and I say to her, “You… are worse than a WHORE!” It's probably better if people just read it.

jacobolus 9y ago
Again, he spent one day amping himself up so that he could spend one evening play-acting as a misogynist jackass, including throwing this single (offensive but also somewhat jokey sounding) line at a woman after she suggested that he buy her a sandwich so they could eat together at her place, but then took the sandwiches he bought and was about to leave without him. She can’t have been that offended by the line, considering she came back a few hours later and invited him to her room. The point of the story is that misogynist jackasses can be successful at finding one-night stands a bar but he didn’t enjoy it, so he only ever tried it twice. Maybe you think that is damning evidence of some inherently irredeemable character flaw, but let he/she who hasn’t ever once spent an evening being an asshole (intentionally for an amateur sociology experiment or otherwise) cast the first stone.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  Feynman initially assumed that if a man bought drinks for a woman, she owed him sex. After these experiences, he assumed that if a man “disrespected” a woman by not buying her anything, she provided him with sex because she was stupid or masochistic. Sadly, in both these cases, he never considered the possibility that a woman’s sexual consent and worth should not be monetized in the first place.
  - jacobolus 9y ago
    (a) Feynman never claims anyone owed him sex. All he said was that the men buying women drinks out of an unrealistic hope of getting a one-night stand out the other end were fools. (b) Feynman never said that not buying her something was “disrespectful” (though the MC did say that the man should (1) be disrespectful and also (2) not buy a woman anything up front). The “disrespectful” part was insulting someone or directly propositioning a stranger for sex in return for a drink. You are reading a whole lot more into the story about Feynman’s “assumptions” and “considerations” than is supportable by the text. Overall I would say your comment is considerably more condescending and offensive than the story. If you want to give Feynman crap about his other treatment of women throughout his life, so be it, but this story is pretty thin evidence for whatever case you’re trying to make.
    - aaron-lebo 9y ago
      That comment is from the post, which again, I'd suggest people read instead of a paraphrase. This is the advice offered to him: “Therefore,” he continued, “under no circumstances be a gentleman! You must disrespect the girls. Furthermore, the very first rule is, don’t buy a girl anything –– not even a package of cigarettes — until you’ve asked her if she’ll sleep with you, and you’re convinced that she will, and that she’s not lying.” This is his conclusion to that advice: The master was right. So the lesson was terrific! You can take from it whatever you want.
      - jacobolus 9y ago
        The master of ceremonies was right, as in: acting disagreeable, pushy, socially superior, insulting, etc., and then directly propositioning someone for sex before paying for anything was effective in practice (at least twice) at getting women at a bar to agree to a one-night stand. Edit: I read “the post”. Either the author has poor reading comprehension and largely failed to understand the content of the story (maybe Feynman can be blamed for not having written it in a clearer way), or she is being disingenuous.
        whatshisface 9y ago
        I think the right phrase here might have passed out of our vocabulary during a long recent period of extreme permissiveness. It's ungentlemanlike to speak of such things.

jacobolus 9y ago

Again, he spent one day amping himself up so that he could spend one evening play-acting as a misogynist jackass, including throwing this single (offensive but also somewhat jokey sounding) line at a woman after she suggested that he buy her a sandwich so they could eat together at her place, but then took the sandwiches he bought and was about to leave without him. She can’t have been that offended by the line, considering she came back a few hours later and invited him to her room. The point of the story is that misogynist jackasses can be successful at finding one-night stands a bar but he didn’t enjoy it, so he only ever tried it twice. Maybe you think that is damning evidence of some inherently irredeemable character flaw, but let he/she who hasn’t ever once spent an evening being an asshole (intentionally for an amateur sociology experiment or otherwise) cast the first stone.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
Feynman initially assumed that if a man bought drinks for a woman, she owed him sex. After these experiences, he assumed that if a man “disrespected” a woman by not buying her anything, she provided him with sex because she was stupid or masochistic. Sadly, in both these cases, he never considered the possibility that a woman’s sexual consent and worth should not be monetized in the first place.
- jacobolus 9y ago
  (a) Feynman never claims anyone owed him sex. All he said was that the men buying women drinks out of an unrealistic hope of getting a one-night stand out the other end were fools. (b) Feynman never said that not buying her something was “disrespectful” (though the MC did say that the man should (1) be disrespectful and also (2) not buy a woman anything up front). The “disrespectful” part was insulting someone or directly propositioning a stranger for sex in return for a drink. You are reading a whole lot more into the story about Feynman’s “assumptions” and “considerations” than is supportable by the text. Overall I would say your comment is considerably more condescending and offensive than the story. If you want to give Feynman crap about his other treatment of women throughout his life, so be it, but this story is pretty thin evidence for whatever case you’re trying to make.
  - aaron-lebo 9y ago
    That comment is from the post, which again, I'd suggest people read instead of a paraphrase. This is the advice offered to him: “Therefore,” he continued, “under no circumstances be a gentleman! You must disrespect the girls. Furthermore, the very first rule is, don’t buy a girl anything –– not even a package of cigarettes — until you’ve asked her if she’ll sleep with you, and you’re convinced that she will, and that she’s not lying.” This is his conclusion to that advice: The master was right. So the lesson was terrific! You can take from it whatever you want.
    - jacobolus 9y ago
      The master of ceremonies was right, as in: acting disagreeable, pushy, socially superior, insulting, etc., and then directly propositioning someone for sex before paying for anything was effective in practice (at least twice) at getting women at a bar to agree to a one-night stand. Edit: I read “the post”. Either the author has poor reading comprehension and largely failed to understand the content of the story (maybe Feynman can be blamed for not having written it in a clearer way), or she is being disingenuous.
      - whatshisface 9y ago
        I think the right phrase here might have passed out of our vocabulary during a long recent period of extreme permissiveness. It's ungentlemanlike to speak of such things.