I like Channing Tatum. I own most of the movies he’s been in, with the notable exception of “The Vow” because I watched it once and cried all the way through. Magic Mike XXL is my very favourite movie – and yes, that assessment includes the Star Wars trilogy. No, it’s not just about the abs; it’s because of the whole combo of road movie/hero’s journey/coming of age/brotherhood themes. Yes, I can say that with a straight face, because it’s actually true. I also like Channing Tatum as a person, from what I’ve seen in interviews; he seems like a personable guy. Overall, as they say around here, “I wouldn’t kick him out of bed for farting.”
I really like Channing Tatum. However, I wouldn’t like Channing Tatum hiding in the hedge in front of my house, peering through my windows. I wouldn’t like him rubbing his genitals through his pockets while he’s talking to me. I wouldn’t like him loudly describing in public which part of my body he’d like to do what to. I wouldn’t like him asking me out for the umpteenth time and telling me that he won’t take no for an answer. I wouldn’t like him obtaining my address or phone number behind my back, particularly if I refused to give them to him. I wouldn’t like him trying to push money or favours on me, and then demanding sex in return as fair dues. I wouldn’t like him saying that it’s not fair I won’t have sex with him, because I’ve had sex with other people so it’s not as if I’m saving it, so why not him? I wouldn’t like him telling me that as he didn’t rape me yesterday, when he had a chance to, I should have sex with him today as a thank you.
I like Channing Tatum a lot. That doesn’t mean that I couldn’t get to dislike him pretty damn quickly if he manifested a lack of respect for my boundaries; if he treated me like a hunk of meat; if he manifested any sense of entitlement about my body or my time; if he one-sidedly decided that “we’ve got something special”; if he didn’t seem to care about my consent. Despite his numerous good qualities, any actions demonstrating those attitudes would cause me to immediately dislike him and not to want anything to do with him.
This rant is brought to you by someone mentioning that old chestnut:
I’d like to be able to dismiss this statement off-hand, ideally via a not-very-controlled explosion. Unfortunately, I can’t. Annoying as it may be, and counterproductive to my argument, there is a kernel of truth in this.
There are people of both genders who either get offended or pretend to be offended when they are approached by people they consider “beneath” them. For some of them, that means most people, though it is infinitely more likely to happen if they find that person unattractive. Although that really sucks in the moment, it really is a good thing. Getting into a relationship with people like this is about as healthy a long-term prospect as repeatedly smacking yourself in the face with a rake, prongs first.
There are also people out there who do not mean to come across as creepy, but they do. Their intentions are beautiful, but they are conveyed in a manner that scares people off. That just plain sucks. However, it is not something that can be cured by re-educating the people who are being scared off. We cannot see and we are not affected by anyone’s inner world. We form opinions about other people based on their actions and the attitudes they display, not what goes on in their heads while they’re doing it.
People’s opinions aren’t static, though. A romantic overture may reveal a mismatch in interest levels, with one person being very keen and the other one being either indifferent, or definitely not keen but with no hard feelings. This mismatch can escalate wildly if the person being turned out reacts badly.
If someone’s response to being turned down is to verbally assault the person turning them down; to use typecasting, loan-sharking, blame, shame, pity, or any other pushy tactics to change their mind; to just ignore their no and carry on asking; to lecture them on how their mate selection criteria are faulty; to act as if the no had been a yes; to bitch about being “friendzoned” but take the “friendship” because it allows them to hang around in case sex is brought back on the menu. Hell, if their response to being turned down is anything that starts from a position of “that’s not fair” or “that’s not right”, that is enough to put them squarely into creep territory. And that’s also the camp from whence most of the bitching about the iniquity of women seems to come from.
There are plenty of ways for people, even incredibly attractive people, to start out with a winning hand and blow it through bad behaviour. Yet the bitching maintains that it’s all about that initial attraction. It makes me wonder about the mentality of those who insist upon it. They seem to believe that all women always judge their potential partners only by their looks, or their clothes, or their cars, or the thickness of their wallets, or insert-superficial-attribute-here. I wonder if that this is how they judge their potential partners: by their value as physical assets. As things. I personally find that rather creepy.