Re: Male sexual assertiveness and female desire (or lack thereof)

[SomeSamSeaborn]

Hey ElizaJane,

This, right here, is your problem, Sam.  What you describe is the system Working As Intended. The whole point is that women get to stop things when they don't want to do them.  When things go out of their comfort zones, they get to abort.  And what you're essentially saying right here is, "I don't want to try interaction with a woman if there is a point we'll hit that's too far."  That is impossible.

No, the way you explain safewording is exactly how it should be. But there is a common understanding of that. And that's really my internalized problem with the narrative - "no" is really not like a safeword. It's more of an indightment. You did something bad. You didn't read me right. Probably on purpose, you're a sexual predator. I don't feel like the narrative incorporates a way to talk about making mistakes. And not making mistakes is impossible given people are not real dolls. I don't really feel like my (the male) side is given much consideration in that narrative, let alone room to elaborate how we interpret female bahvior. And that's because of a fear for victim blaming and slut shaming. And while I can understand that fear, it really cuts of the discussion at a point that could help open it up to actual human communication, which I feel it doesn't include at the moment. That's kind of the point where the conversation ended last night.

[SomeSamSeaborn]

Kleenestar,

I think you may have just said something very important, so can you please clarify? You say you would feel like a sexual assaulter if "that" happened - if what happened? If you made a move and a woman said no?

Yeah, basically, that's a large part of my inability to initiate.

[OneTrueGuest]

Hey ElizaJane,

This, right here, is your problem, Sam.  What you describe is the system Working As Intended. The whole point is that women get to stop things when they don't want to do them.  When things go out of their comfort zones, they get to abort.  And what you're essentially saying right here is, "I don't want to try interaction with a woman if there is a point we'll hit that's too far."  That is impossible.

No, the way you explain safewording is exactly how it should be. But there is a common understanding of that. And that's really my internalized problem with the narrative - "no" is really not like a safeword. It's more of an indightment. You did something bad. You didn't read me right. Probably on purpose, you're a sexual predator. I don't feel like the narrative incorporates a way to talk about making mistakes. And not making mistakes is impossible given people are not real dolls. I don't really feel like my (the male) side is given much consideration in that narrative, let alone room to elaborate how we interpret female bahvior. And that's because of a fear for victim blaming and slut shaming. And while I can understand that fear, it really cuts of the discussion at a point that could help open it up to actual human communication, which I feel it doesn't include at the moment. That's kind of the point where the conversation ended last night.

You know Sam, I think the latter half of your paragraph actually is true, there isn't a place to have those discussions (or at least not many venues for them).  But that doesn't mean that people haven't found ways of navigating sexual relations with each other with the full knowledge that consent is complex.  The thing is, it's a bit like trying to learn how to dance by reading about it.  You can understand the steps, you can understand the different kinds of dance and the debates about what moves should be allowed in competition or not.  But theory won't help you once you're actually there on the dance floor.  You need to interact with real people.  Stop reading.  Seriously.  Start trusting and start interacting and start taking risks.  Life is messy and complicated and you will never find the answer to how to do sex right in an academic article.  

I maintain you are escaping your fear of stepping on someone's toes by doing research and dissecting arguments.  Here's the thing, nothing we can say to your intellectual arguments is going to make that intimate sexual experience for you any easier.  It just isn't.  I'm happy to discuss the absolutism in some current movements with you.  But that isn't going to help you.  It's going to be an interesting conversation, it's going to be a great excuse for you not doing anything, but it isn't going to make sex easier  and less scary for you.

I wish it could.

[Guest]

Hey ElizaJane,

This, right here, is your problem, Sam.  What you describe is the system Working As Intended. The whole point is that women get to stop things when they don't want to do them.  When things go out of their comfort zones, they get to abort.  And what you're essentially saying right here is, "I don't want to try interaction with a woman if there is a point we'll hit that's too far."  That is impossible.

No, the way you explain safewording is exactly how it should be. But there is a common understanding of that. And that's really my internalized problem with the narrative - "no" is really not like a safeword. It's more of an indightment. You did something bad. You didn't read me right. Probably on purpose, you're a sexual predator. I don't feel like the narrative incorporates a way to talk about making mistakes. And not making mistakes is impossible given people are not real dolls. I don't really feel like my (the male) side is given much consideration in that narrative, let alone room to elaborate how we interpret female bahvior. And that's because of a fear for victim blaming and slut shaming. And while I can understand that fear, it really cuts of the discussion at a point that could help open it up to actual human communication, which I feel it doesn't include at the moment. That's kind of the point where the conversation ended last night.

But that's... wrong.  Still.  "No" is NOT an indictment.

Look, I've been dating a guy for over two months, now.  I like him enormously.  We've done fun wild things together that make us both very happy.  And I have explicitly told him "no" at least a half dozen times in that time frame, with easily 2-3 times that many no "signals" -- moving his hand away, backing up a little, etc.  Not because he's doing anything wrong, but because we're trying things out, and learning what we're both okay with.  And he's done the same with me!  Because sometimes I venture into territory he doesn't like, and sometimes he does it with me.  And sometimes I say no when he asks something -- "do you want to head to my place after dinner?" or "do you want to go up to the bedroom?" or "Can I unbutton your shirt?" and sometimes it's in reaction to things he's doing: "Look, I'm not really ready for that yet," or "Um, okay, that's doing nothing for me."

Without "no" as a real option, "yes" isn't meaningfully possible.  And I can absolutely guarantee you that there will be some "no's" in any good relationship, because the "no's" are where you're learning things.

EDIT: I will also note that this language -- "If you say no, you're making me feel bad and guilty" is a kind of toxic rhetoric used a lot by abusers, which is part of why I am reacting as viscerally to it as I am. This is an issue you NEED to get over to ethically date, because if a woman senses it in you, every encounter is going to be tainted by guilt-driven coercion.

[OneTrueGuest]

EDIT: I will also note that this language -- "If you say no, you're making me feel bad and guilty" is a kind of toxic rhetoric used a lot by abusers, which is part of why I am reacting as viscerally to it as I am.  This is an issue you NEED to get over to ethically date, because if a woman senses it in you, every encounter is going to be tainted by guilt-driven coercion.

I love everything you've said in this post but this in particular . . . so much this. Thank you for putting it so articulately and clearly.

[azazel]

For me when he says this:  "So if a woman told me (has happened) to *take her right there and then* I would still have problems doing so because of what I have internalized from this feminist/gender narrative."

This suggests to me that he cannot trust a woman even when she says precisely what he wants to hear (words of consent).  Why can't he trust her?  If it isn't because he's scared of her suddenly changing her mind about consent and thus making him a rapist, what else is he afraid of?  I thought the general crux of his concern was it is impossible to know if a woman truly is consenting ever.  Which means even if she says it, she could be wrong.  So basically, women cannot be trusted to know what they want and can at any point accuse someone of doing something non-consensual, and this is all feminism's fault somehow.  This is, I find personally, offensive towards women on so many levels: women don't know their own minds, we are stupid or callous to the point where if a considerate guy we are attracted to does something we don't like we will instantly accuse them of rape instead of being reasonable people and understanding that it's okay to test boundaries so long as one stops right away, that the movement created to help women is actually an evil movement meant to harm men.  In general, it's just saying women suck.

If there's another interpretation to Sam's posts, I'd like to hear it, absolutely.


ETA:  I mean, gah!  How many times have I been fooling around and a guy does something that isn't bad but I'm not into and I say, "Not interested" and then we continue doing other fun sexy times that are wonderful and hot and . . . he's basically saying that the second a woman is "meh" about something that means she thinks she's being raped.  It goes back to the "Women be overly sensitive yo".  Come on.  We're smart people.  We are nice people.  We are HUMAN BEINGS.  We aren't going around trying to trap men.  We just want to be respected.  And so should you.

My [reference needed] was in response to "the number of false rape reports is so low, equal to the number of false robbery reports"

There are simply no good numbers about the number of false rape reports. You've got the insulting articles where all instances "couldn't prove it was rape" was taken to be a false report, and you've got the naive ones where only the instances where 100% was proven that it was based on falsehoods were taken to be false.

Simply because it's so often a case of A said/B said, there is simply no way to even glimpse at any number that makes sense without huge error margins.

That doesn't play a role in my own inability to make a physical move to women, however small it may be, just to be sure.

[SomeSamSeaborn]

So basically, women cannot be trusted to know what they want and can at any point accuse someone of doing something non-consensual, and this is all feminism's fault somehow.

Well, *people* can generally not be trusted to really know what they want, but that's another layer of the problem - people will think Sprite tastes better if the color of the can is slightly different. So, yes, people and rationality, huge problem, but only tangentially related to this (to the extent that doing something would create the desire for doing that - eg kissing would make someone realise they want to do it - you don't know it unless you try it kind of thing, whereas a lot of the discourse is built upon a non-variable assumption of the preference structure).

Feminisms fault? Well, no and yes, as I said before. There's reasons, and good reasons, for having the discourse as it is right now, but that said, I don't feel like the discourse allows for honest mistakes or honestly includes male perspectives.

ETA:  I mean, gah!  How many times have I been fooling around and a guy does something that isn't bad but I'm not into and I say, "Not interested" and then we continue doing other fun sexy times that are wonderful and hot and . . . he's basically saying that the second a woman is "meh" about something that means she thinks she's being raped.

No, I'm saying that her saying "meh" would make *me* feel like I had assaulted her.

[OneTrueGuest]

I have links to many articles that say it's between 2-8% based on various studies and that that in comparable in other false reports for other crimes, but if your argument is even those studies cannot be believed I'm not really sure what to tell you.

My general point remains, if we lived our lives based on the worst possible outcome, we'd never leave the house. People get mugged, I still go outside with my purse. That kind of thing.

[SomeSamSeaborn]

EDIT: I will also note that this language -- "If you say no, you're making me feel bad and guilty" is a kind of toxic rhetoric used a lot by abusers, which is part of why I am reacting as viscerally to it as I am.  This is an issue you NEED to get over to ethically date, because if a woman senses it in you, every encounter is going to be tainted by guilt-driven coercion.

But no! I'm not saying this to women... sorry if you misunderstood. Nononononono, of course not. I mean, as much as I don't want to hear that no, I'm even more afraid of doing something they don't want and *not* hearing the no. My complaint is not with individual women, it's with the narrative that doesn't really allow me to present my/the male side of a received "no".

I need to run, will be back later.

[eselle28]

ETA:  I mean, gah!  How many times have I been fooling around and a guy does something that isn't bad but I'm not into and I say, "Not interested" and then we continue doing other fun sexy times that are wonderful and hot and . . . he's basically saying that the second a woman is "meh" about something that means she thinks she's being raped.

No, I'm saying that her saying "meh" would make *me* feel like I had assaulted her.

So how do you handle other social situations where you make a misstep and violate someone's boundaries a little? You've never asked someone a question that they perceived as being overly personal, or talked to someone at length and realized later they wanted to leave 15 minutes before you finished, or shared a confidence with someone who was uncomfortable hearing it? You seem to have an active social life, so it's difficult for me to imagine that you haven't dealt with boundary issues in non-sexual ways. How do you get around the concerns you have about initiating more sexual contact?

[SomeSamSeaborn]

My general point remains, if we lived our lives based on the worst possible outcome, we'd never leave the house.  People get mugged, I still go outside with my purse.  That kind of thing.

I'd just like to point out that that's not at all the kind of discourse problem I'm talking about. I'm not afraid I might be sent to jail for attempting to kiss a woman in good faith. I'm concerned about feeling like Schrödinger's rapist when I'm attempting to kiss her. There's a big difference.

[eselle28]

My complaint is not with individual women, it's with the narrative that doesn't really allow me to present my/the male side of a received "no".

Just to clarify: you're more concerned with being able to convince women talking about consent issues to pay attention to your feelings about being told "no" than with actually solving the problems that have made it difficult for you to initiate sexual contact?

[SomeSamSeaborn]

So how do you handle other social situations where you make a misstep and violate someone's boundaries a little? You've never asked someone a question that they perceived as being overly personal, or talked to someone at length and realized later they wanted to leave 15 minutes before you finished, or shared a confidence with someone who was uncomfortable hearing it? You seem to have an active social life, so it's difficult for me to imagine that you haven't dealt with boundary issues in non-sexual ways.

I apologize and move on. Low stakes issues, usually. That's the thing - the discourse around consent has made the sexual conversation so very high stake that errors seem prohibitively costly.

How do you get around the concerns you have about initiating more sexual contact?

I let women initiate it. It's really hard to project masculintiy with that strategy, believe me.

[azazel]

I have links to many articles that say it's between 2-8% based on various studies and that that in comparable in other false reports for other crimes, but if your argument is even those studies cannot be believed I'm not really sure what to tell you.

I can't really tell without seeing those specific studies can I? Hence the [reference needed]

My general point remains, if we lived our lives based on the worst possible outcome, we'd never leave the house.  People get mugged, I still go outside with my purse.  That kind of thing.

People break in, I install locks on my doors. People cheat, I'll run a DNA test in my lab on "my" kids.

Although "People get mugged, I still go outside with my purse" is not a really good metaphor in this case either way. More like "some people are sensitive about their weight, I give no comments to anyone about their weight unless they mention it first" is a better one.

Personally I don't give a shit about being falsely accused of rape. In all likelyhood? Not gonna happen. Creeping someone out by accidentally overstepping a boundary? Waaay more likely, and I don't like creeping people out (Surprise!).

But I pay a cost to never initiate physical touch as a man, and it's probably fucking me over. Still like it more than the alternative.

[SomeSamSeaborn]

My complaint is not with individual women, it's with the narrative that doesn't really allow me to present my/the male side of a received "no".

Just to clarify: you're more concerned with being able to convince women talking about consent issues to pay attention to your feelings about being told "no" than with actually solving the problems that have made it difficult for you to initiate sexual contact?

No, the opposite, if I understand you correctly here.

Really need to run.

[Robjection]

My general point remains, if we lived our lives based on the worst possible outcome, we'd never leave the house.  People get mugged, I still go outside with my purse.  That kind of thing.

People break in, I install locks on my doors. People cheat, I'll run a DNA test in my lab on "my" kids.

Although "People get mugged, I still go outside with my purse" is not a really good metaphor in this case either way. More like "some people are sensitive about their weight, I give no comments to anyone about their weight unless they mention it first" is a better one.

Personally I don't give a shit about being falsely accused of rape. In all likelyhood? Not gonna happen. Creeping someone out by accidentally overstepping a boundary? Waaay more likely, and I don't like creeping people out (Surprise!).

But I pay a cost to never initiate physical touch as a man, and it's probably fucking me over. Still like it more than the alternative.

It kinda sounds like you don't really have a way of dealing with the situation when you accidentally overstep a boundary. If you did have a way of dealing with it, maybe it might make things a bit more tolerable?

[eselle28]

So how do you handle other social situations where you make a misstep and violate someone's boundaries a little? You've never asked someone a question that they perceived as being overly personal, or talked to someone at length and realized later they wanted to leave 15 minutes before you finished, or shared a confidence with someone who was uncomfortable hearing it? You seem to have an active social life, so it's difficult for me to imagine that you haven't dealt with boundary issues in non-sexual ways.

I apologize and move on. Low stakes issues, usually. That's the thing - the discourse around consent has made the sexual conversation so very high stake that errors seem prohibitively costly.

What about a more serious social error, like being perceived as being racist?

[azazel]

It kinda sounds like you don't really have a way of dealing with the situation when you accidentally overstep a boundary. If you did have a way of dealing with it, maybe it might make things a bit more tolerable?

Well, there the perks of having a mother like mine come in

She absolutely refuses to draw any boundaries (because she's a proper woman and isn't supposed to have boundaries), until you cross one too many and she flips her shit.

You become an expert at identifying anything that might be a boundary and defusing situations when you accidentally cross one. Of course, on the flipside you rather gnaw your own leg off than coming even close to such a maybe-boundary, but all superpowers come with a cost I guess.

[Mel]

As I said in my reply to kleenestar, it's hard to explain non-verbal and "uncommunicated" parts of the communication. She's in her late 30s, she knows what she wants, and she shouldn't be too constrained by social expectations. We had a discussion about life goals, aging, and desire when we were outside after the first part of dancing. There was some vulnerability. It was in a social setting where *everyone knew her and me*. So, also given the entire gender dynamic, and even in an artsy and very progressive circle, this was different than making out in a dark corner in some club where no one's watching. I don't care too much about that, because, well, gender dynamics, again. But she apparently does, and it's entirely reasonable for her to do so. So I'm not sure what obvious indication you're looking for, but for me, it was pretty obvious that she would have enjoyed making out that night, but that logistics weren't conducive. Am I 100% sure? No, as I said. While I was pretty sure she'd have enjoyed making out with me, I was only 75% sure she'd want me to project masculinity to help her get over the double binds of the social setting, which, again, is nowhere near my threshold for even considering this. So that's how that played out. Just got an invitation from her, not sure if that's evidence for anything with respect to that evening, but she clearly wants to continue the conversation.

So, to use the classification now very publicly introduced into the gender discourse: I think there was a preponderance of evidence that she wanted to make out, but not beyond reasonable doubt, there was also not a preponderance of evidence that she wanted to make out *in that social situation*.

This sounds to me like a whole bunch of assumptions. "Well, she's old enough to know what she wants, and she talked openly about vulnerable subjects with me, so that suggests she wanted to make out." Um, I'm in my mid-30s and I'm totally capable of taking about vulnerable subjects with a guy without wanting to make out with him.

In any case, the other info here suggests it may be a totally different dilemma than you're framing it as.  If she didn't want to make out in front of a bunch of friends in that context, then she didn't want to make out at that moment. Her "no" was genuine. This has nothing to do with how you were "performing" masculinity and everything to do with her comfort levels about PDAs in general.  I think it's pretty patronizing of you toward her to assume that she was probably only uncomfortable with verbally telling you she wanted to make out (presumably you asked her off to the side, not loudly in front of everyone, so it's not as if anyone except you would even have heard what she said, so I don't see how the presence of the friends would even affect this) rather than uncomfortable with making out at all in that scenario.

If you meet a woman who seems to expect you to treat consent unethically--to push or pressure for sexual activity after she refuses consent--then the ethical thing is not to give in.  There are, clearly, women out there who are okay with giving clear consent.

Most of you seem to be under the impression that there's an even distribution and this is merely a matter of looking in the right places. I do not get that impression *at all*, anywhere.

<snip>

You're right, framing is very important, too, in asking for a kiss. "May I kiss you?" (personal experience about 2/3) is about twice as effective as "Do you want to kiss me?" (personal experience about 1/3).

Wait.  So you claim you don't get the impression there's an even distribution or that you could find women who are okay with expressing consent clearly if you just looked, but at the same time you admit that you have about a 66% success rate with asking to kiss the woman, and a 50% success rate even once you include phrasing it as asking if she wants to kiss you?  How is that not an even distribution?  How can you honestly claim that your experience tells you a significant majority of women aren't okay with this at the same time as sharing your experiences showing the opposite?

I mean, hello, how could your bias be showing more clearly?  I don't understand how you could have said these things within a paragraph of each other and not realize how contradictory they are.

How does that conflict with the feminist narrative?  This woman is not asking you to take her without consent. Telling you to "take her" is giving you consent. Where in the mainstream feminist narrative are people saying that it's not okay to have any particular kind of consensual sex with another adult?

There's no problem with that, of course. I used the example to explain how *I* have been affected by the feminist discourse, contributing exactly to the kind of anxiety and inability to see through that in moments like the one described.

And I repeat, how is this an effect of the feminist discourse?  If the feminist discourse says, "You need enthusiastic consent for sex to be okay," why on earth would that affect you in such a way that you have trouble accepting a woman's clear verbal enthusiastic consent?

[reboot]

It kinda sounds like you don't really have a way of dealing with the situation when you accidentally overstep a boundary. If you did have a way of dealing with it, maybe it might make things a bit more tolerable?

Well, there the perks of having a mother like mine come in

She absolutely refuses to draw any boundaries (because she's a proper woman and isn't supposed to have boundaries), until you cross one too many and she flips her shit.

You become an expert at identifying anything that might be a boundary and defusing situations when you accidentally cross one. Of course, on the flipside you rather gnaw your own leg off than coming even close to such a maybe-boundary, but all superpowers come with a cost I guess.

Shit, we related? Because I have the same mom. It just made me acutely aware of body language and nonverbal cues so I could detect the unvoiced boundaries

And good reaction times because mom has a tendency to throw things when she explodes.

[OneTrueGuest]

No, I'm saying that her saying "meh" would make *me* feel like I had assaulted her.

Why? Why in the heat of passion and she's totally into you, and says, "Honey I don't like that particular thing, now kiss me hard" do you think you'd have assaulted her? She doesn't think you have assaulted her. She wants to keep going. Please explain why because to me it still comes across like you not trusting women and thinking we are incapable of complex thought that allows us to not like one particular thing, but totally still want to do a bunch of other extremely sexy things with you. It still comes across deeply disrespectful of women to me.

And it also makes me concerned that basically you are saying that unless a woman is 100% happy with every single thing you guys are doing, you won't have sex with her. So basically you won't allow a woman you get involved with to express anything other than absolute joy in everything you do together or else you'll punish her. You will basically punish her for expressing she would prefer you do something else by cutting her off from sex completely. If a "meh" makes you think you are raping someone, then your partner is going to feel obligated to keep her mouth shut just so you don't get the wrong idea. Which means, ironically, you might actually end up actually assaulting her, forcing her to do things she doesn't want to do for fear you will accuse her of assaulting her otherwise. Sex isn't just all good or all bad. It's a conversation. It's a mutual discovery. What one person likes, another might not and vice versa. You not allowing any woman to say, "Hey Sam, I'm not really into that, but could you do this instead" is, well, awful. There's no perfect sex. It needs to be worked on. So either this means you will never have sex ever, or you will force a woman who loves you and cares about you and is turned on by you to have less than fantastic sex just so you won't punish her by stopping being intimate with her just because she isn't as keen about one particular thing even though she really still wants to have sex with you.

Do you see that?

[azazel]

Shit, we related? Because I have the same mom. It just made me acutely aware of body language and nonverbal cues so I could detect the unvoiced boundaries

And good reaction times because mom has a tendency to throw things when she explodes.

My mom never gets physical luckily. But it took me some time to learn that things she *said* she was mad about weren't actually the things she was mad about.

And of course, when you told her that she was being unreasonable and it would work better if she actually *communicated* her boundaries, she started going on how terrible a person she was.

The only way to win such emotional terrorism (as far as I figured it out) is actually not giving a shit about the other person anymore when you're in discussion with them, because they can't beat themselves up to hurt you and they stop quite quickly when they notice! Should've figured that out ages ago.

[reboot]

No, I'm saying that her saying "meh" would make *me* feel like I had assaulted her.

Why?  Why in the heat of passion and she's totally into you, and says, "Honey I don't like that particular thing, now kiss me hard" do you think you'd have assaulted her?  She doesn't think you have assaulted her.  She wants to keep going.  Please explain why because to me it still comes across like you not trusting women and thinking we are incapable of complex thought that allows us to not like one particular thing, but totally still want to do a bunch of other extremely sexy things with you.  It still comes across deeply disrespectful of women to me.  

And it also makes me concerned that basically you are saying that unless a woman is 100% happy with every single thing you guys are doing, you won't have sex with her.  So basically you won't allow a woman you get involved with to express anything other than absolute joy in everything you do together or else you'll punish her.  You will basically punish her for expressing she would prefer you do something else by cutting her off from sex completely.  If a "meh" makes you think you are raping someone, then your partner is going to feel obligated to keep her mouth shut just so you don't get the wrong idea.  Which means, ironically, you might actually end up actually assaulting her, forcing her to do things she doesn't want to do for fear you will accuse her of assaulting her otherwise.  Sex isn't just all good or all bad.  It's a conversation.  It's a mutual discovery.  What one person likes, another might not and vice versa.  You not allowing any woman to say, "Hey Sam, I'm not really into that, but could you do this instead" is, well, awful.There's no perfect sex.  It needs to be worked on.  So either this means you will never have sex ever, or you will force a woman who loves you and cares about you and is turned on by you to have less than fantastic sex just so you won't punish her by stopping being intimate with her just because she isn't as keen about one particular thing even though she really still wants to have sex with you.  

Do you see that?  

Got to second that bolded bit. Sometimes things are angled funny and you need to ask someone to change it up. It could be that her vaginal canal and your preferred angle in a specific position do not work because you bump the cervix or poke into the vaginal wall and hit something ouchy. Or it could be that she is ovulating and that position bumps into an achy ovary. It could be that whatever it is just is not working for her but something else would. You may also bump into her asking to do things that do not work for you or bend you in uncomfortable directions. A "No" in these situations is vital feedback to mutually satisfying sex.

Not letting someone express their "No" during sex without taking it as a huge deal is shutting down the entire act is how you end up with a partner who resents you and grits their teeth and thinks of England during sex.

[fakely mctest]

[mod]After some modly discussion we've decided that this thread has wandered far enough off course that I'm going to go ahead and lock it. Anyone who wants to continue discussions on the various branching subjects should feel free to start a new thread with a narrower focus.[/mod]