After writing my last post on Cord Ivanyi teaching boys chivalry I found a story on the same topic by ABC News. It had a hilarious quote by the acting VP of NOW:
NOW Unsure of High School Etiquette Lessons
But Erin Matson, acting vice president of the National Organization for Women, said she wonders if singling out the boys for good manners is the way to go, even though she called the idea of old-fashioned manners “adorable.”
They had a quote by the mother of one of the girls in the same class which was similar:
“I was a little torn to begin with as a child of the 1970s and growing up with women’s lib and women’s rights,” she said.
But now, she said, it’s almost like a “lost art form” seen only in old movies.
This nostalgia by feminists for the good ol’ days is surprisingly common. In December of 2009 Hanna Rosin, perhaps the most hairy legged feminist of them all, bemoaned changing gender roles in her article The rise of the kitchen bitch. She opened the article with:
Ladies, it’s time to reclaim cooking.
A little later on she writes:
I first heard this term in Sandra Tsing Loh’s recent Atlantic story about her divorce. She used it to describe a friend’s husband who was anal and fussy and altogether too feminine—he belonged to an online fennel club, for God’s sake. Loh’s bitch was wholly unsavory, a prop designed to justify universal divorce.
Granted, many would argue that her feminist credentials come out entirely untarnished. After all, she was emasculating her husband in the feminist submagazine he let her create after he became editor of Slate. Plus, feminism’s core philosophy is about women bitching. Still, I find this rather strange.
Loh wrote about her own nostalgia for traditional gender roles in her NY Times Op Ed piece My So-Called Wife:
I am stricken with the peculiar curse of being a 21st-century woman who makes more than the man she’s living with …
…I seem to have an ever more recurring 1950s housewife fantasy. In this magical Technicolor world, the breadwinner husband, Brad, leaves home (where his duties are limited to mowing the lawn and various minor home repairs) at 7 a.m. When he returns from work at 6 p.m., aside from a savory roast with mashed potatoes, his homemaker wife, Nancy, has pipe, slippers and a tray of Manhattans ready.
And who can forget the quote by feminist Pamela Haag from the Daily Mail piece I referenced in my Trapped in a not unhappy marriage! post. Ms. Haag complains:
From a historical perspective it’s a departure. Go back to the Fifties and husbands and wives had many different roles – as hostess, decorator, breadwinner, volunteer.
Likewise all of the women complaining about reversed gender roles in Alpha women, Beta Men. You may also recall how blogger Big Little Wolf feels that men should offer women chivalry, although she feels this has nothing to do with gender roles:
My planet is called Fred – where I get to pick and choose the typically masculine or feminine behaviors that suit me…
Pick up the tab for a date? Yes – I will expect that….
Guys – is opening doors not your thing? No problem. I’m not going to hold it against you.
I’m capable of opening doors, pulling out chairs, and so on. However, if you drive a truck or SUV, given my diminutive stature, you are going to have to offer me a hand to climb up into the seat, and a hand to get back down. (At five feet, it’s either that or a step stool.)
I was confused by this at first, because if you offered a short man a boost into your truck or SUV you would have a fight on your hands. After much consideration, I came up with a handy way for men to remember what she expected:
chivalry means giving the little lady some extra help
I thought she would be delighted that I had made sense of her seeming contradiction, but later in the day I noticed she had a new post up about how people can be mean on the internet. To this day I’m at a loss as to how she ended up with a picture of me.
But I have saved the best for last. I found a blog by a women’s studies major discussing Cord Ivanyi teaching boys chivalry titled, Bringing Old-School Back (emphasis mine):
…when I read the article“Teacher Emphasizes Old-Fashioned Etiquette”by David Knowles, I couldn’t help but hope that Old School was trying to make another comeback.
..the boys became accustomed to anything from pulling chairs out for the girls to sit, to standing up whenever a girl entered the room–something I hadn’t come across since I read Pride and Prejudice last year. And I was happy to read that the girls loved it.
Happy indeed. Men waiting on women, what’s a feminist not to love? She continues:
As a women studies major who is familiar with feminist criticism, I have a good feeling that many would view these practices as sexist. Such behavior from men may imply that women are weaker and more helpless. That if women begin to accept this behavior as normal, they will believe in and become comfortable with their dependence on men.
She is of course right. The charming ladies at Feministing may have required medical attention after reading about this. But as I said, I saved the best for last. The women’s studies major blogger continues (emphasis mine):
But I would like to offer another level of insight. When men and women are seen as the same, men somehow always seem to get the upper-hand…
More than ever now we are realizing that men and women are not quite the same, after all. And Ivanyi’s lessons from the past are finally being called in to shed light on a problem we have been unable to solve.
Knight image modified from image by David Ball & PRA. Manhattan and cake image by Quinn Dombrowski.
I’m glad I am not a woman. What a curse it is to be a female. Can never e happy.
I think feminists experience a high degree of cognitive dissonance, causing them to examine every single thing in a million ways, which leads to them not being happy. Even feminists must feel that they’d like to have a man taking care of them, but they’re quick to repress these desires because it goes against what it’s in their head, against feminist principles that men and women are equal, and that not only do they not need men, it’s wrong to feel otherwise and this must be devastating to them.
I imagine it must be tough and tiring to continually push aside nature for the sisterhood and imo, this cognitive dissonance leads to women never being happy and experiencing nostalgia for the older days, even though they feel ashamed and are not willing to do their part for it
Hanna Rosin? She’s charmingly in the news again, girding loins for taking up the Pro cudgel in the great “Men are finished” debate next week. I can’t make much sense of her ideas as she expresses them in Slate, except to note that she’s never met a sweeping generalization that she doesn’t like. Unless she disagrees with it.
I’ll never get those two minutes back.
— mgwk
“Ladies, it’s time to reclaim cooking”
By this she means women doing most of the meal preparation in the family household. Fair enough.
But when I think about how most of the great cooks and chefs were (and are) still men. Most of the recipes were probably written by men. The entire technology of cooking – cookware, stoves, cutlery, utensils etc. – were (and are) invented and built by men. And how the development of different materials like cast iron, stainless steel and copper; each with it’s own unique characteristics that contributes to different types of cooking.
Who figures this stuff out?
Who discovered the processes of frying, boiling, baking, steaming, curing, smoking, broiling, grilling, distillation and fermentation?
Who learned how to grow, identify and grind different grains and turn it into flour, and then determine which types are suitable for different kinds of baking? Or which spices and herbs are best for a particular recipe?
Who figured out how to build a fire? Or discovered the temperature that sugar caramelizes at?
Think about all the applied metallurgy, chemistry and physics that goes into modern cookery.
So Hanna Rosin wants women to reclaim something that is built on a male dominated infrastructure, without which, there would nothing to reclaim. She wants women to reclaim their functionary role, like the female managers she gushed about in her “End Of Men” spiel.
The “End Of Men” my foot.
Didn’t men also invent sandwiches? I think Hanna needs to reclaim that skill and go make me one.
This is quite simple. Women sense, and rightfully so, that the wheels are about ready to come off the US and European world, both economically, and socially. War has always followed major economic fall in the west. It will follow again, and they sense it. Chivalry my ass. Their equal now, and it’s their turn in the breach. They know they put themselves here and the wiggle out begins.
Expect more of this as things devolve and they begin to seek the comfort and protection of the men they discarded during the “fun” years. I’ll continue to counsel young men to just sit back and watch. They have little to defend anymore.
“But I would like to offer another level of insight. When men and women are seen as the same, men somehow always seem to get the upper-hand…”
hahahahaha!
Priceless, from the “Feminist Studies” Major…. LOL…
Men ALWAYS “win” because we are rational, not emotional.
Logic trumps emotion every time.
Dahmer, Manson, Gacey, you name the male mass murderer and there is a line of women who would have sex with or marry them. Prison officials report hundreds of letters and packages with panties enclosed etc. Show me a similar male response to a murderess (e g. that gal who drove her car into the lake drowning the kids so she could be with her new boy-toy)… there is NO male interest in them…NONE! When a woman demonstrates craziness, guys run away…women are attracted to crazies like moths to the light.
When women “won” their feminist battles…tired of being just sexual outlets in the home for their working ( read supporting their ass) menfolk and demanded to be freed from the home and treated as “equals”, storming into the workforce; they woke up to find that they are still nothing but sexual outlets, only now they have to get a job and support themselves. And, minus the wedding band, they are prime pump-n-dump material…men get the milk without having to buy the cow.
Paging Doomed Harlot. Paging Doomed Harlot…..
Cosign livingwell’s post above. Cogent analysis.
I’d only add that I think it’s funny that women as a group once again now ask that men step aside and hand over to them all the benefits, while continuing to demand that men carry all the burdens.
Women are tired of doing tough grunt work of being in the workforce and bringing home the bacon. No, they’ve had enough of playing around at breadwinner, so now they want to retreat to the comforts of hearth and home. But notice there’s no concomitant promise from women of submission to husbandly authority. No promises of kindness or gratitude for men enabling them to stay home. No, these women won’t even pledge of sexual fidelity to their men. No, they want to be at home to shtup the poolboy while hubby is off making the money.
And in other news, the Flat Earth society has finally decided to acknowledge the existence of Ferdinand Magellan. Film at 10.
@detinennui32
She just sent me an email explaining that she will be commenting shortly. She was busy whipping up a roast and a tray of Manhattans for her husband. I think she had to run out and buy him some new slippers and a pipe, too.
Ah, it’s like the old punchline about how it is impossible to please a woman. Give them what they want and they are unhappy. Don’t give them what they want and they are unhappy. Quite honestly I have never know a woman who said “I’m 100% happy” with the life she was leading, the greener grass effect, which is common to both men and women, seems to be stronger with them.
It’s best for a man not to expect his woman to be entirely happy, in life or with him. That way, when she talks about how unhappy she is, he will know it’s just a woman being a woman, and not take it personally. What women need more than anything else in this world is a man who is stable they can rely on, which is why passing all those sh*t tests is so important to them. When they bitch, tell them to knock it off, or let it roll off your back, or yell, or do whatever you want, as long as you don’t let it affect your emotional state, and she’ll eventually be happy again.
Doomed Harlot is an AI bot running on an old x86 with Slackware Linux on it, in a freshman dorm at Stanford. “She” hasn’t been around because they needed a new power supply for the box.
TFH: I suspect you’re right, unfortunately. From freedom, to prosperity, to satisfaction, to complacency, to apathy, to slavery, to war, to freedom, to prosperity……
If and when it all comes crashing down, I fear a lot of women will have to fend for themselves. They won’t be able to. And a lot of soft men won’t be able to defend themselves either.
Off-topic, but right up Dalrock’s alley:
Good news for women, divorce means that they are Re-singled – not to mention that it’s a time of Renewal, allowing for Reinvention and Redefinition. Why!, It’s a time of Rebirth:
[D: Pretty amazing, and a great example of how far too many women view marriage/divorce today. I still prefer my term Post-Marital Spinster to her resingled. I love the comment by the other divorce blogger that divorce is just a natural stage of marriage, too.]
God, these women are so full of shit!
http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2008/03/in-beginning-back-in-1955.html
“. And I was happy to read that the girls loved it.”
Yeah, the problem arises when fried ice isn’t available.
The four R’s in divorce are the cornerstone of who we each want to become and who we once were. It is not often that we get afforded the opportunity to change our inner being into that person we always knew we were or want to be.
Remember, rebirth equals Four Rs — Renewal, Reinvention, Redefinition and being Re-singled. Remember also that rebirth is beautiful.
Metaphysical divorce porn.
I keep envisioning a Power Point slideshow behind a panel of “experts” like Deepak Chopra and Oprah. Or Mike Myers as the love guru.
It is not often that we get afforded the opportunity to change our inner being into that person we always knew we were or want to be.
An angry, sexually frustrated cat herder.
Yes, democracy has a life cycle.
I keep thinking that all this dystopian future novels are somehow a glimpse of things to come for USA…what do you think will substitute democrazy?
[D: Pretty amazing, and a great example of how far too many women view marriage/divorce today. I still prefer my term Post-Marital Spinster to her resingled. I love the comment by the other divorce blogger that divorce is just a natural stage of marriage, too.]
I knew nuclear energy will mutate the hamsters to never seen levels of delusion…I told you natural hamsters nuclear hamsters are radioactive for at least 40 years or till everyone starts to have grandchildren.
Next time you will see that only empowered women get divorced and that women that are married for more than 10 years are brainwashed by patriarchy.
Also can you place a trigger alert warning in this kind of links? I want to lose weight without vomiting my food thank you very much.
the women are now standing at the abyss, putting their toe out into the frigid empty air and saying to themselves “the water seems just fine”
uncognitive dissonance, they are lying to themselves without even knowing why they lie
I find that whole article disgusting, and it makes divorce sound like something to be desired, something beneficial and something that women might actually compete over–who doesn’t want to be rejuvenated in that way?
I’d hate for divorce to become so normalized that it’s seen as merely a step in one’s life, and what about the wedding vows, and agreeing to stay married for life?
Any time a woman calls a man (or something about him) cute, adorable, or anything along those lines, it is a recognition of extreme betaness. Depending on her self-awareness, she may or may not realize this. Typically women have a relatively low tolerance for beta in general, or only accept as much beta in their men as they have matching alpha qualities.
Theory says, Alphas will benefit from adding chivalry. Betas will either not benefit or do damage to their relationships. Proceed with caution.
I’m torn on this. Chivalry is a great deal more than the courtesy toward and the protection of women. While I agree that feminists deserve no protection based on their gender, there are many aspects of chivalry that are central to a sane and functional society. Honor, trustworthiness, protection of the weak are all parts of this. Chivalry exists not because those who benefit deserve it nor because someone expects to directly gain from being chivalrous, but because the chivalrous choose not to live the type of society that results when all chivalry is abandoned. Chivalry is different from “white knights”. Automatic mindless defense of female absurdity is not required. It is perfectly chivalrous to let someone reap the results of their foolishness.
Also a part of chivalry is living one’s life to a higher standard, as they understand it. I’m perfectly willing to watch feminism melt itself down. Hell, I’ll bring the beer and popcorn. I am not prepared to let them pull civilization down when they do. Nor do I think that the presence of chivalrous behavior on the part of men will save feminism from itself. So for my part, to the extent that chivalry is present in my life, it will remain. The old adage about the baby and it’s bath water come to mind here.
uncleFred – ”Also a part of chivalry is living one’s life to a higher standard, as they understand it.”
”Honor, trustworthiness, protection of the weak are all parts of this. Chivalry exists not because those who benefit deserve it nor because someone expects to directly gain from being chivalrous, but because the chivalrous choose not to live the type of society that results when all chivalry is abandoned. Chivalry is different from “white knights”.”
The problem is that the boy’s are not being taught the Code of Chivalry, they are being taught the “etiquette” of Chivalry – and they are essentially being forced to adhere to it, regardless of how the girls may chose to treat them.
And, one cannot fully separate being subjected to these so-described “etiquette lessons” and the rest of what the boys are being force-fed in all other spheres of life – especially in school. If they are like the vast majority of boys in this country today, they are constantly bombarded with the idea that girls are not their equals, but are, in fact, quite superior to them. And, as boys (future men) they are told they are the inferior gender in our society.
It is not that they are living up to their own higher standard, but rather they are complying with the higher standards believed to be deserved by those who’s lives are already held to be of a higher caliber.
Thus, the fundamental elements of the Code Of Chivalry – the deference to, and protection of the weak (the inferior) – cannot be applied. Instead they are being taught to be respectful of girls, and to be mindful to always assist them not because the girls are in any way weaker or in need of assistance, but rather because, as girls (future women) they are owed such reverence due to their superiority. It’s really much more akin to the girls being held up as “Nobility” (a thousand little princesses), and the boys being taught/forced to further pedestalize them.
And, frankly, the hoped for result in this does seem to be to shape them into future White-Knights, all to happy and willing to sacrifice of themselves as inferiors for the sake of their superiors, the women.
“When men and women are seem as the same, men somehow always seem to get the upper-hand…”
I’m fascinated by this women reasoning capabilities.
“More than ever now we are realizing that men and women are not quite the same, after all. And Ivanyi’s lessons from the past are finally being called in to shed light on a problem we have been unable to solve.”
Three questions:
1. Why the inherited differences between the sexes should be regarded as a problem?
2. Who is “we”?
3. How could this person – or anyone else, for that matter – eliminate human intrinsic dissimilarities?
Here’s Pat Robertson, not helping:
http://news.yahoo.com/pat-robertson-says-alzheimers-makes-divorce-ok-000952197.html
I have often read over the last couple of years where females have castigated feminists for lying to them and also only giving them half of the puzzle’s answer to lead a normal life (work is more important, baby making later). Endless harping by the opposite sex is having the appropriate affect and as feminist grow older their priorities changes as well. The feminists are in a pickle and they know it and now they have to find a way to cover their butts.
It is becoming a comedy..
An alpha friend just bedded a 9 (women are very attractive in sunny Perth) and when she asked him what he did for a living he responded in a serious countenance, “I’m an internet spammer, I steal peoples identities on-line.” Mind you this is while he has a girlfriend and a single mother on the side for benefits.
So much for chivalry.
The fact that your enemies tell you what you ought to do – even if they are hoping to take advantage of your doing as you ought – does not make them incorrect.
This ‘rediscovery’ is thoroughly amusing, but it’s also a mildly encouraging sign: some of the feminists haven’t taken total leave of their senses; there’s still something in them that says, fairly correctly, ‘this is right; that is wrong’ – even if it is only, at this point, capable of speaking truly only about other people. Better them than the sort who revel in smashing every tradition and inverting every order.
“Remember, we know why single women specifically have cats as pets, rather than parakeets, fish, or even small dogs ”
I always thought it was because cats were assholes. You know, Alpha. You pet the dog. The cat lets you pet him.
Did women ever “own” cooking? Seems like most of the famous chefs that I can think of have always been men. NAWALT, Julia Child, of course…
unger, you’re so cute…
Dragnet,
I’m not a Pat Robertson apologist, but the question posed to him was if the wife is stricken with that disease and I start seeing someone else, should I divorce…to that he said yes. The context being, divorce before starting a new relationship.
The follow up questions were about death do us part et al…and here he was maladroit in his answers…true.
Lets face facts, he too is getting older and has made comments that reflect the sometimes stark honesty that the elderly on occasion spout. Like when my sainted mum ( about Robertson’s age) recently said to my sister-in-law “still have that baby fat huh?”….her kids are 14 & 16 respectively…ouch!
Not really surprised. Simply the ongoing feminist attempts on having their cake and eating it too. Any guy considering this as a sign for becoming a white knight again is going to be disappointed quickly (or worse, manipulated for a while before the letdown happens). All those women should be redirected to the old Roissy post about chivalry and feminism being incompatible. Me? Not ever looking back. Once you see the crown is made of lead, you don’t ever in your life pay for it and everyone still trying to convince you is a con man. People asking for a return to traditions and marriage are doing exactly that.
It’s the broken social contract.
Women tore up their old contract but still insist that men maintain their old contract.
Red pill men have it figured out while the blue pill hordes wallow in confusion and disappointment.
It’s weird, since I took the Red Pill, I feel like I have been granted superpowers.
Note what is missing from the nostalgia? Any reciprocation beyond empty words. So as others have pointed out, these feminists wish to eat their cake and have it too, the usual one-sided deal where men have obligations and duties, while women have choices. As slwerner points out so well, the young men in Arizona are not being taught actual chivalry, but merely the etiquette. They are, so far as I can tell, being trained to be pack animals – beasts of burden who perform duties for essentially nothing. That’s not anything like a reasonable way to organize a society.
It’s the form of chivalry without the substance. I’m afraid unger among others doesn’t quite see that. Let’s put it this way: the White Knights and the feminists they pedestalize are offering a gold bar – but close examination shows it’s actually lead, with gold paint on it. It looks like one thing from a distance, but close up it’s clearly something not worth very much. Should we buy this “gold” bar, or pass it by? Is it worth the cost, or not? I say it is fake, and not worth the cost at all. How do I support this claim?
Once again, Game lights the way. Ignore the words of these nostalgia-ridden feminists, and look at their actions. What actions to they offer in exchange for men’s traditional roles? Would anyone here want to eat anything they cook? I know I would not.
That pic made me LOL.
I always thought it was because cats were assholes. You know, Alpha. You pet the dog. The cat lets you pet him.
Actually cats behave and sound like small babies, IMO. A dog begs you for food and attention the baby manipulate you with sounds and behaviors to get protection and resources from the owner, specially considering that cats can fetch for themselves a lot better than dogs, is a total sublimation of motherly instincts hence why there are a ton more crazy cat ladies, than cat gentlemen, YMMV.
Oh dear God… it’s taken them 60 years of systematically destroying western society’s way of thinking about and treating women, to realize that for the most part, western society sort of had it dialed in? That traditional manners and courtesy and male roles were not demeaning toward women, but catering to them? Of course men get the upper hand – feminists have stated* that they want to own the repsonsibilty of providing for the family, to destroy traditional manners and gender roles, and to give away sex for free – and any man standing in the way of that gets a public shaming as a sexist bastard. Dummies. They’ve turned most of us from bulls, into feed lot cattle. Congrats gals.
Ironically enough, the feminists have done more to justify traditional negative and comedic stereotypes of female flightiness, gullibility, and silliness, than traditional women who have all along expected a man to open the door, made him wait for sex, and insisted on marriage. A 60 year project to put women in a dissatisfying and ultimately disempowered social position is a bigger pratfall than even Lucille Ball could have imagined.
The damage is done, NAGs. You’re going to have a tough time stuffing Gene back in the bottle. He’s tired of your shit.
*Yes, feminists have said they wanted to ditch all that traditional stuff and have fought in court and Congress and culture to make it so; but all along we’ve been treated to a competing narrative about how men suck because they no longer provide the stuff or act like Daddy did toward Mommy. In addition to being a Morton’s Fork of a political philosophy, it makes it look like it’s a political philosophy based on what the PUA / Game folks seem to think is hard wired in women – saying one thing, while actually wanting the opposite.
Stephanie Rowling has a good point about the vocalizations of cats resembling those of children, however that is mostly true of kittens and female cats. Male cats often are more like dogs. I’ve known of cats that, doglike, would go for a walk with their master, or sit and wait for a child at the school bus stop. Tomcats, like dogs, will bring game back home – although unlike dogs they are not so inclined to share it.
Stephanie Rowling has a good point about the vocalizations of cats resembling those of children, however that is mostly true of kittens and female cats. Male cats often are more like dogs. I’ve known of cats that, doglike, would go for a walk with their master, or sit and wait for a child at the school bus stop. Tomcats, like dogs, will bring game back home – although unlike dogs they are not so inclined to share it.
Very true, my cat is female although she does has some dog like features like following me around the house all the time and see what I’m doing, like doing the dishes and licking me and my husband (but she is Dominican like me and at least 1/4 feral,so maybe there is some pack traits on her i know of female Dominican cats that bring back dead mice home to their parents), but my husband’s parents do have a male cat that follows us when we are out, although he doesn’t take walks with them. I guess we need to see if crazy cat ladies adopt more female or male cats to see if my theory is right.
I’m on the off tangent here. Chivalry was instituted in the High Middle Ages to keep the knights from slaughtering peasants who were required for harvesting food and keeping the land. So that Chivalry was basically a means to channel the thuggery of highly trained warriors who were a threat to both nobles and Kings.
Chivalry was dead, dead, dead by the time Cervantes wrote Don Quixote, killed by gunpowder, the age of colonialism and exploration, and mass armies not knights backed by feudal levies.
What we think of chivalry is merely a faint echo of a corpse, the methods of politeness that men in the West had for women. Women who mostly chose men on their own, but critically … wait for it … wait for it … did not choose on SEXINESS ALONE. But men for the long haul. Chivalry in that sense extended to: old women, one’s sisters, female servants, random women one might meet on the street that one had no interest in whatsoever. HOWEVER, that society was predicated on not much sexual competition among men on who could be the biggest bad-boy (because female selection was driven by long-haul qualities).
Even basic politeness is going to fail, and fail massively, because to the baddest bad boy goes the spoils. Period. You don’t want low level clerks losing billions for I-banks, better have rigid internal controls on trading. You don’t want rudeness, you better prevent men from leveraging bad boy appeal one way or another to gain in the sex/romance marketplace. Period. And some methods will be better than others.
Coming out of lurking for a moment…
Interesting that feminists want men to act ‘traditionally’, while not wanting to do so themselves. I was driving a few days ago, and flipping across the radio dial, when I heard two women on a show saying they were “conflicted” about actress/singer Zooey Deschanel. She’s perhaps best known as the female lead in the Will Ferrell movie “Elf”. They then mentioned her ‘defensive’ comments on the subject in _New York_ magazine, where she said:
“That people equate being girlie with being nonthreatening … I mean, I can’t think of a more blatant example of playing into exactly the thing that we’re trying to fight against. I can’t be girlie? I think the fact that people are associating being girlie with weakness, that needs to be examined. I don’t think that it undermines my power at all.”
Mrs. Z (she’s married to the lead singer of the band Death Cab For Cutie) will be on a new TV series, hence the magazine article… which may have points of interest to other _Dalrock_ readers:
http://nymag.com/arts/tv/profiles/zooey-deschanel-2011-9/index4.html
Back to lurking…
gdgm+
“The fact that your enemies tell you what you ought to do – even if they are hoping to take advantage of your doing as you ought – does not make them incorrect.”
It does, however, make you retarded for doing exactly what they expected you to do when they had already meticulously planned in advance on how to take advantage of you if and ONLY IF you behaved in the manner they expected you to. We have learned though rigorous experimentation and data collection that women depend on men doing one particular set of very stupid things, dictated by custom and encouraged by women as “polite”,”charming”,or even sometimes “quaint”,in order to manipulate or bring harm to them. It would appear that they are incapable of advancing a harmful agenda under different circumstances,due mostly to that trait which is often found in conjunction with the aggressiveness or callousness of the con man or petty thug, and that trait is incompetence.
While your point stands unassailable in its moral and ethical correctness,nonetheless it is tactically inadvisable to play into an enemy’s hands unless you have a trap ready to spring on them-and we don’t.They are the ones who bear malice, legal and social weaponry, and the will to use it against their chosen enemies-us. We are simply babes in the woods. Deer to their wolf. Like deer,then, our best hope is in catching scent of the predator beforehand and taking a different path, or relying on our camouflage to keep us out of the predator’s sight. A chivalrous man is to a woman what a rabbit with a broken leg is to a wolf.They love chivalrous men-fresh meat.
“I’m glad I am not a woman. What a curse it is to be a female. Can never e happy.”
This is the closest to my general perception of women writ large. Feminists, anti-feminists, counter-feminists, educated, not educated, working, homebound, whatever. No social class or demographic is protection from woman’s constant and often dissonant reframing of events to play martyr. I don’t get it, I really don’t – I’ve dedicated myself to being happy with what I’ve got in life (even as I reach for better), and part of that is decided to stop worrying about a lot of stuff. It has been a conscious choice that has paid off for me tremendously. Most women in my life can’t seem to do that, they have a self-codependent need to be bothered by something. If something isn’t on their radar, they’ll make up a first-world problem to carp about. It’s wild.
PrivateMan,
“It’s weird, since I took the Red Pill, I feel like I have been granted superpowers.”
I feel that way too. Not that I have many opportunities to do so, but it’s a bit of a rush to tell an entitled princess “no, I’m not doing that,” and watch her squirm and stomp her feet, and know it’s OK for me to not feel bad about it, because she’s being obnoxious.
For those who didn’t click the link from namae nanka,
http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2008/03/in-beginning-back-in-1955.html
The oft-ridiculed “good wife’s guide” is a spoof cooked up in the 90’s, there never was such a document in 1955. However, it goes exeplify the false dichotomy that feminists love to indulge in, such as if you suggest that American women could stand to get in better shape, they will scream at you that you are demanding unreasonable physical standards and want women to develop eating disorders.
The best men can hope to do for now is to avoid interacting with women altogether except on a short term, as-needed basis (this includes playing the PUA game for sex).
Otherwise it’s pretty much lose-lose for the guy. And deeply frustrating to boot. Why keep beating your head off a brick wall when your head is already bleeding?
Jim wrote at November 14, 2011 at 2:49 pm:
In Japan this is done to extreme.
Japan leads the way in sexless love:
/ Kari Hurtta