...here-in lies the problem with the internet...as part of the electronic "ME" era the ability to empathize, to put us in the other persons shoes is diminishing. Empathetic feelings are less when reading a written word than when talking to someone where you can see facial expressions and hear tonal inflections. As more and more people spend less time interacting one-on-one the "Me" or "narcissistic" era is growing. Originally Posted by kittyloveratxI agree that is an insightful observation, I would add at least two additional elements:
1) In cyberspace it is not possible to get a bloody nose from "going too far" unlike the real world bar room symposiums message group "debates" frequently resemble. People are somewhat restrained in face to face situations by the low but not zero probability that the person you offend might literally call you out to the parking lot. And who knows what he might have in his waistband? This is a consequences-free arena here, at least for men, so why not go for baroque?
2) The other factor is that for most men the most important thing in life, bar absolutely nothing, is appearing manly to himself in front of the male peer group. Most males, starting at about age 8-9, are consumed with behaving "manly", as judged by their same sex, same age peer group. A pre-teen knows nothing about what "masculine" might be except that it isn't "feminine" and so define themselves over against the mysterious and somewhat threatening Other.
Some men grow up to develop a little more sophisticated view. Others just get taller. That seems to be where the Blue Team's locally hyperactive attack pack gets its members.
As to why ladies are reluctant to post anything that is not insubstantial flirting, that, seems a bit obvious: this is a business and as a service provider in a very, very competitive sector who is willing to risk alienating a potential customer? He might be an uncouth lout but he might have money and might chose not to spend it on someone whose opinions or tastes he doesn't agree with as manifested in a Coed thread. Why take the chance and get a lot of grief from the Attack Packers?
I realized as I read his post that KittyloverATX was probably also right that some of the most vitriolic of the Bros Before you know what posters are probably having their anger reinforced by the economic processes that are dividing this country into the Rich ten percenters and the Non-Rich Majority. The latter, where most Customer Guys, myself certainly included, and all of the ladies are located has had static or declining real incomes for decades. When the boy geniuses of Wall Street blew up the world economy just before the last election things got a lot worse for a lot of people very quickly. The Hobby is my only source of what makes life worth living. Possibly that is true of others, married or not. My own personal financial situation got better this year vs last year. If it had gotten worse I imagine I would be feeling pretty frustrated or depressed. Many people prefer to externalize negative feelings like that as anger. Directing that anger against women in the business makes no sense but anger is an emotion not a decision and, in any case, a very large percentage of men are chronically angry at women anyway, in and out of the Hobby, so it is not surprising to see some of that anger focused on any woman who puts her head up above the trench line in our cyber battle field with anything but a deeply discounted "special". The ladies can't be blamed for being reluctant to draw fire by expressing an opinion.
It might be true that the most angry of the Blue Team snipers don't have much money to spend anyway but a woman who must pay the bills every month might reasonably decide not to take the chance of losing a paying session. The Guys in question mostly don't like to talk to women anyway so it might not be so bad and the money spends the same.
