is there an ereader market for straight men?

[nguirado]

As you inferred at the end of your post, I'm not sure our personal experiences and inductive reasoning alone are the best indicators of gender distinctions.

I'm always amazed at the changes in culture-defined gender from generation to generation. I have a friend whose gaydar is completely inoperable when the object is under twenty-eight. She hasn't grasped that interests, modes of dress and behavior she'd grown up associating with gay people are now mainstreamed and straight as well.

But all of the common signifiers of gender seem gratuitous to me.

I think there are real differences that transcend setting and some that are fashion. We can exaggerate or minimize.

In the second, biology makes any man's need to prove his manhood redundant. If we're comfortable with ourselves, we shouldn't have to beat people to death with a preference that's obvious to anyone who bothers to look.

Anamardoll: Understood.[/QUOTE]

You're right here. However, some masculine and feminine behaviors are either learned or capable/worthy of reinforcement. This is the idea behind the rules of chivalry and Emily Post.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by nguirado

I think there are real differences that transcend setting and some that are fashion. We can exaggerate or minimize.

My point is that you and I aren't objective about the anthropology of gender and therefore aren't in a position to know what we "exaggerate or minimize." Culture and its patterns of association tend to make the artificial appear natural and therefore normative.

However, some masculine and feminine behaviors are either learned or capable/worthy of reinforcement. This is the idea behind the rules of chivalry and Emily Post.

I'm not quite getting why you've brought up the history of chivalry and etiquette, which are (a) a completely different topic, (b) actually prove my point about cultural artificiality if you look at the conventions pitilessly (C.S. Lewis's Allegory of Love is a good place to start), and (c) aren't subjects about which one necessarily displays ignorance simply by pointing out our arbitrary notions of gender.

Re your idea about the biological/evolutionary bases of chivalry (if I understand you correctly): You could probably find and read evolutionary psychologists who agree with you on this, but I doubt you'll warm to certain unchivalrous pronouncements they tend to make in tandem with that theory.

[Refom1]

Originally Posted by pidgeon92

Actually, it's a handbag.

It's both. Hermes makes handbags, leather goods, scarves, and more.

[Refom1]

My very heterosexual husband is an avid book buyer (he has a Kindle). He enjoys a wide variety of subjects: science fiction, environmental issues, history, religion, philosophy, art, politics, war, music, economics, social science, etc. He will read just about anything.

Don't think he has any books on how to get laid though. Most married men have long since figured that out. :-)

[TedJ]

Originally Posted by Sue7M3

Don't think he has any books on how to get laid though. Most married men have long since figured that out. :-)

1. Buy jewellery.
2. ???
3. Profit!

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Sue7M3

...Don't think he has any books on how to get laid though. Most married men have long since figured that out. :-)

The trick is not getting caught by your wife!

(Peggy, if you're reading this, . Love you, baby! )

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

Me too, but if it were true it would, in one fell swoop, explain my awful dating history and absolve me of all blame regarding said history. However, it would also be a disappointment because I'm still seeking a man who reads because he wants to read, not for the purpose of "getting laid and making money".

Hint: look for the guys which developed their love for reading before the attraction of woman awakened in them. Unfortunately a lot of them have behavioural patterns, which from PUA viewpoint would classify them as betas. (what as a matter of fact prevents you to percieve them as potentially attractive partners)

Spoiler:

are you still sure that the "pleasure typo" was a typo?

Originally Posted by hermes

Instead of fascinating marvels of how-to secrets on life's greatest questions not 'why am I here?' but 'where do get laid?'

@hermes
If you just want to get laid - look out for those which get paid. If you are interested in more, you should be able to be and offer more. Therefor reading for self-education and making one think WHY isn't useless.

I read to *prepare* for the real world

Nevertheless you shouldn't expect that anything you read is able to grant you such a preparation - Don't mistake knowledge for wisdom.
Books are there to make us think - but the thinking we have to do by ourselves.

[JSWolf]

So is the reader for straight men no good for anyone who is not a straight man?

Seriously, this thread is an abomination and crass and offensive.

[poohbear_nc]

Moderator Notice
This thread has strayed well off topic and has been closed by the Moderation Team.