"None of us are going back to a world in which we only put out once he's put a ring on it" even if it's in their best interest to do so.

2013-12-18T06:53:23+00:00

The fundamental misunderstanding at the heart of this whole endless conversation is female sexual and romantic entitlement, that women not only can have it all, but that they should have it all, that men and "Society" are obligated to give women something and that they have no right to ever expect something in return. "Give, and it shall be given unto you," is the lesson women need to learn before they can move past Feminism and hook-up-culture and "wanting it all", and until they do this deep cultural anxiety about women's place in the world will persist, and continue to eat away at Femininity from the inside out like the canker it is.

The "Damsel In Distress" narrative archetype has come under a lot of scrutiny recently, but like a lot of what it criticizes, Feminism only shows its own arrogance and wrong-headedness in believing it can destroy something so universal, something humanity has created and reaffirmed at every turn for literally thousands of years. What Feminism doesn't seem to get is that the princess in the tower is doing something, she isn't a prop or an object, the story only happens at all because of what she does. She doesn't just do nothing, she actively makes herself someone deserving of rescue, she acts so as to be worthy of being saved by the hero.

She isn't just automatically entitled to what the prince in shining armor does for her, she has to earn it.

Transcendentally speaking the mind divides itself into two fundamental energies or powers, two antagonistic faculties eternally working in opposite directions, but at the same time, despite their mutual exclusion of one another, each depend upon the other to exist at all. On the one hand, there is the sensuous, apprehending impulse, which gives content, or material to the mind. On the other, there's the formal, comprehending impulse which shapes that material into a uniformity and connects the diversity of objects together into an ordered whole. The former impulse is passive, and "Feminine", the latter, active and "masculine". But "passive" doesn't mean inert or inactive in the everyday sense of the word, transcendentally passivity is in itself a kind of activity.

The "Damsel In Distress" trope appeals to us, as a species, because it possesses a certain inner, self-evident truth or universality to it, it isn't an artificial and arbitrary creation of a "Patriarchal" culture designed to further the alleged oppression of women, rather, it's an outward expression of something going on inside of all of us.

Nothing is more unappealing to me than a woman's sexual entitlement. Approaching a woman I don't know, in some public or social setting, is about creating an opportunity for romance, nothing more. Only rarely do I actually go through the trouble to initiate with a woman, for all the women I see and interact with on a day-to-day basis, it's only very occasionally that I feel compelled to express any overt interest to one of them, and it's never solely a result of her physical attractiveness, or what she's wearing, or how her hair is done, it's primarily something I overheard her say, or the book I see her glancing thorough at the used book store that makes me take notice and actually consciously make the effort that goes into approaching a woman.

By approaching a woman I'm not saying that I necessarily "want" her, not yet at least, I'm only creating an opprotuniy for myself to ascertain whether or not I might be interested. Frankly, over time I've basically stopped doing this altogether because of the way women take what I'm doing for granted. "Of course this guy is talking to me, I'm hot, I'm sexy and fun and feisty, I'm empowered, every guy wants to be with me, why wouldn't they?"

I once approached a woman simply to ask her for directions and had her contemptuously bark at me to "get lost creep", and I sort of started to realize then that this narrative of women being constantly overwhelmed by fear of rape and sexual harassment contained within it, in part, a delusive sexual vanity, a presumption of desirability. Women who go through life reading sexual interest into every male action around them, who then self-righteously take to the internet to spout Feminist talking points about "Rape Culture" and chauvinism seem to often be suffering from hyper-inflated egos, and it's not whether or not they actually are in fact desirable that's the issue, it's that they believe that desirability to be so beyond question.

To be rescued a woman has to be worth rescuing, to be approached by a man, to have a prince brave the many perils he faces in the course of his adventure, that's something that has to be earned, it's not something you just get to have, you have to have a little humility about yourself, and realize that nobody has to do those things. You have to be grateful and give back. The gender crisis our society is living through right now stems from the out-of-control culture of validation and flattery which fuels the contemporary Feminine ego.

The whole idea of "Men on Strike" is a really powerful one I think, because it subverts the narrative that the underengagement of men with society and its problems is a result of laziness or not doing what it is that they're supposed to. "Men on Strike" twists that around and throws the phenomena of male apathy back in the culture's face, men aren't doing what you want them to do anymore because you aren't doing anything for them, the princess is no longer worth saving.

And that's the sad thing, when there isn't a princess worth rescuing, the hero doesn't get to go on his adventure, he doesn't get to grow and learn and test his skills and brave obstacles and develop as a human being. It's like today women are up in the tower, tapping their feet impatiently, "where is he? doesn't he know I've been waiting for him to rescue me all day? who does he think he is?" but they don't realize men don't care anymore, that it just isn't really even worth the effort anymore.

That women who want it all later in life must spend their youth prim and sexless, waiting for men to prove that they've got themselves together both professionally and emotionally?

Yes. A lot of men in their 20s need women, but women have created this intimacy destroying machine of hook-up-culture. I don't know about anyone else, but hook-up-culture has absolutely eviscerated my desire for women. With a lot of women in their late 20s or early 30s, especially the dilettante social media content creator type who writes articles like this, I sometimes wonder how long their longest dry spell was. It seems their 20s are just this revolving door of vague, non-committal polyamorous "relationships", there's always another guy right around the corner, there's always another man ready to step in to replace the last, and women never end up growing as people, that's all there is to it.

When a woman turns 30 and suddenly wants to "settle down", nobody cares, nobody wants to save you, it doesn't mean anything anymore. Men want to feel desirable too, they're individuals with insecurities, when you take what they do for you for granted, when you turn 30 and say "ok, now it's your turn losers I didn't care about before, you may now have the privilege of rescuing me," the sense of entitlement is incredibly offputting.

2013-12-18T09:27:02+00:00

Are we supposed to believe that the solution to a biological double-standard is a sexual double-standard?

Is that supposed to be a rhetorical question?

littlelibertine · 2013-12-18T21:02:29+00:00

Great, incisive article. I'm so tired of mansplaining men assuming that they know more about the experience of women than, say, a woman does.

Title	"None of us are going back to a world in which we only put out once he's put a ring on it" even if it's in their best interest to do so.
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	3
Comments	3
Date	December 18, 2013 3:42 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1t567m/none_of_us_are_going_back_to_a_world_in_which_we/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/none-of-us-are-going-back-to-a-world-in-which-we.1155856 https://theredarchive.com/post/1155856

Comments