Feminists claim men's "paternal" attitude towards women is "oppression". Men respond by withdrawing and treating women as equals. Women respond by claiming this new-found equality and lack of chivalry is "misogyny". The f-ing nerve.

Gareth321 · 2009-06-28T02:32:36+00:00

In all fairness, I think we're only seeing the most vocal of protagonists. Individual women have been quite consistent with what they want and don't want. The women who wanted equality are not complaining that they don't have their car doors opened for them. Those that didn't want equality [those that kept quiet] are now quite annoyed that their free dinners and chivalrous pamperings are disappearing.

BestServedCold · 2009-06-28T07:55:15+00:00

[permanently deleted]

rmbarnes · 2009-06-28T11:33:55+00:00

I thought this was excellent. Hit the nail right on the head. The issue is 100% equality vs the woman taking the good stuff but not the bad stuff.

Take Wimbledon tennis. Last time the tournament was on woman complained they were paid less than the men. The counter argument was that men played more sets than woman and gained higher television audiences and brought in more advertising money.

So would paying the woman the same at Wimbledon be equality? IMHO the answer is both yes and no. This is complete equality: Men and woman are paid equally, but there is no woman's event and no man's event. There is just the one competition, and only the X best players in the world get in. How many women get to play in Wimbledon under those rules. I know some still would, but my point is that a lot of woman who currently do get a pay day from Wimbledon would now get nothing. They wouldn't be good enough to compete.

ulfada · 2009-06-29T06:32:47+00:00

The author's sheer inability to cite fact or quotations when "women said" or "trends clearly indicate" is only the beginning of the issue with this lunatic rant. In the same few paragraphs he complains that women make as good of soldiers as men and should be subject to the draft but that they also would be helpless if men stopped protecting them and an army invaded. If there are feminist authors complaining about chivalry being gone, I haven't read any of them. Clearly, neither has this author. It's just convenient to imagine them into existence so he can continue crying about not getting the "respect" women owe him as a big, tough man.

lynn · 2009-06-28T03:48:27+00:00

Men respond by realizing they hold all the cards and stop giving a damn what women respond with.

wulfilia · 2009-06-28T05:27:46+00:00

Well said. Somebody had to say it.

Gareth321 · 2009-06-28T05:24:48+00:00

I think the author might have relationship issues.

Erudecorp · 2009-06-28T06:20:38+00:00

Oh no, not claiming. That's worse than raping.

So what? Let women do what they want. It only matters because the real problem is still men. This is for the obvious reason that power in the hands of men is shaped by men's natural instinct to stamp out competitors. Women's natural instinct is to have "sex" with (with the exception of homosexuals) men. While that could sometimes lead to controlling men to sexual ends, the conclusion remains more strongly that men oppress men more than women oppress men.

AnnArchist · 2009-06-28T19:23:37+00:00

Tell them to watch Gran Torino, the barbershop scene, to figure out how men talk to each other.

2009-06-30T17:36:04+00:00

Beynon concluded in his 2002 book, Masculinities and Culture, that men and masculinity were overwhelmingly presented negatively and as “something dangerous to be contained, attacked, denigrated or ridiculed”.

Don't forget "medicated"!

Comments