Chivarly = ''benevolent sexism'

Mr.Applepie

Morgase wrote: »

@ Mr. Applepie's wife: There are more fun and mutually beneficial ways of expressing love than scrubbing your husband's clothes clean

Shhhh, you'll only be putting ideas into her head!

I think that may have been more directed at our daughter more than me seeing as I would do a % of the washing every week.

HellFireClub

Have to say, am starting to get a bit sick of this constant drive by feminists to sanitise everything we say, to try to catalog and document every little word and phrase that is muttered by men, to try to record every act we make, all for the purposes of searching intensively for some kind of offence against women...

Showing basic manners like holding a door open for a woman is now taken up as making some kind of bland statement to the effect that the woman is somehow unable to open a closed door for herself.

Have these people nothing else to be doing with their time??? People who go on like this, regardless of what their gender is, I've found in the past to be loners, career failures and odd balls, and this is how they get through life, by becoming obsessed with the undertakings of others.

Seriously, how utterly messed up are these femimists, they are making women look like absolutely obsessed idiots and are bringing shame down upon their sex, it's like some kind of a cult gone wrong or something.

There was a video link thrown up on a forum here recently about women who staged a protest in Tesco in the UK (which had banned customers from wearing pyjamama, i.e: CHAVS, from the store), and the response of this feminist movement was to picket and upset the business of the store, and why?!?!? Because Tesco's had the audacity to ban Chav/pyjama wearing layabouts, but had not complied with their demands to have mens/lads porn mags taken off shelves.

So it seems from the ultra feminist agenda, that you can have women's rights, (as in the right of a woman to appear in a porn mag and for the mag to be available in Tesco if she so wishes), once those rights for women have been vetoed and censored by ultra feminist loo-laa's.

Bears and Vodka

I thought helping those weaker than you (and women on average are physically weaker than men) is common sense and good manners. Its like helping the elderly or children.

Morgase

I dislike being relegated to the level of children or the elderly. Do some men really think that women are that helpless? Seriously?

HellFireClub

Morgase wrote: »

I dislike being relegated to the level of children or the elderly. Do some men really think that women are that helpless? Seriously?

You are physically weaker than a man. A man will have a lower/weaker pain threshold than a woman. A woman has a stronger life expectancy than a man. Men and women are inherently different in the physiological sense, and I think that nature designed that those differences should compliment each other, not be used as a foundation for one stupid debate after another.

Feminist's who harp on and on about this and are continually trying to stir shít in this regard should be asked what issues they have with their inner self fulfillment, or their careers or what the hell is wrong with them cause them to want to continually pick arguments against men.

Galvasean

"The researchers created a list of such damaging acts as: helping a woman to choose the right computer, calling a group of both men and women "guys""

If I didn't refer to my female friends as 'the guys' they'd be annoyed.

Is this seriously what passes for feminism these days? Seriously, have they nothing better to do with their time than look for offense everywhere and anywhere?

edit: Actually, I wonder if I were to apply some of the same niceties to other men would I be demeaning them too?

HellFireClub

Galvasean wrote: »

"The researchers created a list of such damaging acts as: helping a woman to choose the right computer, calling a group of both men and women "guys""

If I didn't refer to my female friends as 'the guys' they'd be annoyed.

Is this seriously what passes for feminism these days? Seriously, have they nothing better to do with their time than look for offense everywhere and anywhere?

I hate to think I'm living in a world where if I'm talking to a group of my friends, "what will I refer to them as, in case I offend some loo-laa in the group???"

I've often heard a tour guide referring to a group, A FEMALE TOUR GUIDE AT THAT, "Right guy's we are heading over here now!"

Seriously, how did feminism end up getting so utterly petty?!?

Morgase

It is not correct to say that I as a woman am physically weaker than a man. (After all, you don't know what my build is!)

It is correct to say that the average woman is weaker than the average man. There is a difference.

As for feminism, I suppose it depends on one's definition of feminism. I consider myself to be a feminist (or egalitarian, if you prefer) yet I do not spend my time harping on about anything. Sometimes I have reasoned discussions with men and women to make them think about why they act in the way they do, but I don't go picking fights.

SugarHigh

metrovelvet wrote: »

Lets be under no illusions. While I can get the coal bag out of the boot of the car and around the gate, it does take me 20 minutes to do it.

Yes, but if they aren't able for the physical demands of a job, should they be doing it? Why should male employees have to do extra work to cover for them?

Hyperbullet

So the bottom line, I shouldn't hold the door for a woman anymore because I'm being sexist?

The world is turning into a f*cking joke, soon you won't be able to take a shower without offending some lunatic.

HellFireClub

Speaking as a man, it's getting harder and harder every day to respect women. The nonsense that is emerging these days, the bitchy caustic way that women who proclaim feminism are carrying on, it's offensive to men in the extreme I think.

Otis Driftwood

HellFireClub wrote: »

Speaking as a man, it's getting harder and harder every day to respect women.

I presume you mean some women.In my experience women like this are in the overwhelming minority.

Ive read on other forums on boards over the last few years of instances where men have held a door for a woman and have been met with a scornful look.I have to say,not once in my entire life have I ever encountered anything like this.

Regardless of gender,if Im approaching a door at the same time as someone else or I happen to meet someone coming the opposite direction,I always step back and hold the door,its basic bloody manners.

Same goes for someone,male or female lifting something.If they look like they are struggling then I will offer them a hand.In the cases with females (and males it has to be said) it has always been well received and not once have I gotten snapped at or had any type of negative reaction.

Id wager that the majority of people reading this very thread would agree with me too.

As I said,females that would make an issue of something so frivolous as holding a door are few and far between.

Hyperbullet

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

I presume you mean some women.Iin my experience women like this are in the overwhelming minority.

Ive read on other forums on boards over the last few years of instances where men have held a door for a woman and have been met with a scornful look.I have to say,not once in my entire life have I ever encountered anything like this.

Regardless of gender,if Im approaching a door at the same time as someone else or I happen to meet someone coming the opposite direction,I always step back and hold the door,its basic bloody manners.

Same goes for someone,male or female lifting something.If they look like they are struggling then I will offer them a hand.In the cases with females (and males it has to be said) it has always been well received and not once have I gotten snapped at or had any type of negative reaction.

Id wager that the majority of people reading this very thread would agree with me too.

As I said,females that would make an issue of something so frivolous as holding a door are few and far between.

You're spot on man. Manners are something everyone should have, just a damn shame that people with decent manners are few and far between.

HellFireClub

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

I presume you mean some women.In my experience women like this are in the overwhelming minority.

Ive read on other forums on boards over the last few years of instances where men have held a door for a woman and have been met with a scornful look.I have to say,not once in my entire life have I ever encountered anything like this.

Regardless of gender,if Im approaching a door at the same time as someone else or I happen to meet someone coming the opposite direction,I always step back and hold the door,its basic bloody manners.

Same goes for someone,male or female lifting something.If they look like they are struggling then I will offer them a hand.In the cases with females (and males it has to be said) it has always been well received and not once have I gotten snapped at or had any type of negative reaction.

Id wager that the majority of people reading this very thread would agree with me too.

As I said,females that would make an issue of something so frivolous as holding a door are few and far between.

Maybe holding the door open is a bad example as I would consider like yourself that any person in front of me letting a door close in my face has an issue with their fundamental manners.

But say you're out for dinner with a girl you are in a relationship, (as in going out the door of your house to dinner, or leaving the restaurant after dinner), and you help her put on her coat, (say it's winter and its a big coat), this is treatment that is specific to the gender. What I mean is that if I was out in a pub with my mate, he can put on his own jacket. Now back at the restaurant, so can the girl in my company, but what is so offensive about helping a girl but on a coat???

I was at a wedding recently and a lad I know who was checking into the hotel for the wedding, was with a girl who was smaller than him, but him being a bit on the ignorant side, was happy to let her haul their suitcase up a flight of stairs while he barged on ahead of her. I thought this was disgusting carry on, but it seems that the feminist reckons that this is right, or that they should both carry their own suitcases???

It's a fúcked up world I think...

SugarHigh

Galvasean wrote: »

Is this seriously what passes for feminism these days? Seriously, have they nothing better to do with their time than look for offense everywhere and anywhere?

I think a big problem feminism has is justifying it's continued existence. If a group has one goal and it achieves that goal then it no longer serves a purpose but it will still try and justify its self by inventing problems.

HellFireClub

SugarHigh wrote: »

I think a big problem feminism has is justifying it's continued existence. If a group has one goal and it achieves that goal then it no longer serves a purpose but it will still try and justify its self by inventing problems.

It's human nature to never be happy with your lot. I'm convinced that women who practice active feminism in terms of protests and attending seminars, etc suffer with serious inner identity issues.

SugarHigh

HellFireClub wrote: »

It's human nature to never be happy with your lot. I'm convinced that women who practice active feminism in terms of protests and attending seminars, etc suffer with serious inner identity issues.

I'm not sure but I do think a lot of feminists make being female too much of their own self view. Even they way they can take pride in something a woman does simply because it was a woman. It's a bit weird, I can't imagine ever being proud that an achievement was accomplished by a man. It's kind of how some people make their nationality a large part of their self so they will take pride in something accomplished by someone who shares their nationality.

BarackPyjama

Egalitarianism is a good thing. Ironically though, ultra feminism is almost entirely exclusive to the Western world where the misandrists who practice it have absolutely no appreciation of just how easy their lives are.

As children around the world starve to death on a daily basis, some women in America allocate massive resources to produce a report about how evil men are for holding the door open for them.

Words fail.

the_syco

Often when I hold the door open for a man/woman, I'm holding it, looking the direction that I'll be heading, and thus not always towards them.

When I see that they have gotten through the door, I let go of the door.

=-=

Most of the ladies in the tLL would describe the Feminists in the OP's post as "Nazi-feminists".

HellFireClub

the_syco wrote: »

Often when I hold the door open for a man/woman, I'm holding it, looking the direction that I'll be heading, and thus not always towards them.

When I see that they have gotten through the door, I let go of the door.

=-=

Most of the ladies in the tLL would describe the Feminists in the OP's post as "Nazi-feminists".

I wouldn't get into mentioning that particular forum and it's occupants, only going to end in a row.

DoesNotCompute

From now on, I'm going to shut the door in women's faces, just to keep the Femi-Nazis happy

iptba

HellFireClub wrote: »

A man will have a lower/weaker pain threshold than a woman.

It's generally accepted now in medical circles and the like that men have higher pain thresholds than women.

tbh

HellFireClub wrote: »

I wouldn't get into mentioning that particular forum and it's occupants, only going to end in a row.

yeah and so to prevent the rows we've added a new rule to the charter and made countless warnings on threads to tell people to stop bitching about other forums, the ll in particular. And yet you're still doing it...so what action have we left? For the last time. Talk about the topic, or don't. Any further remarks like this about forums can and will result in a banning at the mods discretion.

It's quite a simple concept and we've spelled it out over and over. I'm genuinely getting sick of people ignoring what we're trying to do.

metrovelvet

SugarHigh wrote: »

I'm not sure but I do think a lot of feminists make being female too much of their own self view. Even they way they can take pride in something a woman does simply because it was a woman. It's a bit weird, I can't imagine ever being proud that an achievement was accomplished by a man. It's kind of how some people make their nationality a large part of their self so they will take pride in something accomplished by someone who shares their nationality.

It's because there were so many obstacles for women along the way, closed doors and barricades, and glass ceilings, that when they do get somewhere it's a pretty big deal.

Like having a black president for example. Paul Robeson had a football schlarship to Columbia Law. His career started out as a lawyer, but his secretary refused to take notes for a black man. He decided he wasnt going to have much success as a lawyer if his own secretary didnt take notes for him, so he went into entertainment. So, given the history, when a member of a group that has faced a lot of obstacles manages to make it through them, its a big deal.

SugarHigh

metrovelvet wrote: »

It's because there were so many obstacles for women along the way, closed doors and barricades, and glass ceilings, that when they do get somewhere it's a pretty big deal.

Does any of this really still apply?

Like having a black president for example. Paul Robeson had a football schlarship to Columbia Law. His career started out as a lawyer, but his secretary refused to take notes for a black man. He decided he wasnt going to have much success as a lawyer if his own secretary didnt take notes for him, so he went into entertainment. So, given the history, when a member of a group that has faced a lot of obstacles manages to make it through them, its a big deal.

But I'm talking about women in the 21st century. These obstacles simply aren't there for women as whole and I'd go as far to say that due to the effort of re-balancing through unofficial quotas women today are better off than men.

metrovelvet

SugarHigh wrote: »

Does any of this really still apply?
But I'm talking about women in the 21st century. These obstacles simply aren't there for women as whole and I'd go as far to say that due to the effort of re-balancing through unofficial quotas women today are better off than men.

Well, they are supposedly not there for anyone NOW, but it still marks an achievement for the group of which they are a member, whether it race or gender. It creates legacy, role models, possibility. It tells those groups they are not imposters when they even make the attempt at achieving something.

Do you know in my High School English currculum there was not ONE book written by a woman? I went through school thinking women couldnt write fiction that deserved attention. What do you think that says to girls... probably that they shouldnt bother even trying.

And I do think they are there ...just not as obvious as they used to be.

I dont know what you mean by unofficial quotas.

SugarHigh

metrovelvet wrote: »

Well, they are supposedly not there for anyone NOW, but it still marks an achievement for the group of which they are a member, whether it race or gender. It creates legacy, role models, possibility. It tells those groups they are not imposters when they even make the attempt at achieving something.

They wouldn't feel like impostors if they didn't judge themselves by their gender. If I enter a job and I'm the only Irish person there I won't feel like an impostor because it's not what I judge myself by. If I was less qualified than everyone else then yea I might. If they didn't allow their gender to make up such a large part of their own self view I don't see why they would care how many men or women there are.

Do you know in my High School English currculum there was not ONE book written by a woman? I went through school thinking women couldnt write fiction that deserved attention. What do you think that says to girls... probably that they shouldnt bother even trying.

And I do think they are there ...just not as obvious as they used to be.

I don't see it as a big deal that there weren't any female novelists and I don't think we should be adding authors based on their gender. I read a few weeks ago that some Mexican author has been pulled out of obscurity and placed on the curriculum in the US to give Mexicans a literary role model. I just think this is nonsense, if they weren't judging themselves by their nationality there wouldn't be any need for this. How about they look up to an author because of their writing and not their gender/nationality?

I dont know what you mean by unofficial quotas.

If a company or college course has a large proportion of men they will start targeting women.
Special work internships for women
http://www.nywici.org/students/internships/internships-available
Special scholarships for women in Science.
http://womeninplanetaryscience.wordpress.com/2008/09/18/scholarships-for-women-in-science/

It's obvious that if they offer advantages to women that they don't to men it's because they are trying to reach a quota. While not all companies will go as far as offering an internship targeted at women if they have the choice between similar applicants it's going to the woman.

If you're a woman entering a male dominated industry you are at an advantage not a disadvantage.

funki_munkee

As a woman, can I just say bring on the chivalry!! Some things you just need a hand with....(or dont want to do, going back to the cutting the lawn example someone mentioned earlier!!) I dont find it to be sexist in any way, more a sign of a man being helpful and kind than anything else! Though I may be punished by feminists everywhere for saying that...!!:D

Morgase

Expecting (not even asking but expecting) a man to cut the lawn for you because you can't be bothered to lift a hand is just lazy.

kayos

metrovelvet wrote: »

Do you know in my High School English currculum there was not ONE book written by a woman? I went through school thinking women couldnt write fiction that deserved attention. What do you think that says to girls... probably that they shouldnt bother even trying.

I remember all to well having to do Jane Austin's Emma for the LC and all of her work for the pre-dip for the London College of Music. So I don't know where you did your schooling or if they have changed the LC English course that much as to get rid of all female writers.

But what I will say on the matter is that no curriculum material should be picked based on the gender of the author. Just like I don't agree with the idea of positive discrimination. I would prefer the political candidates that are put forward for election be picked for their abilities not based on their gender. That is really just going the wrong way.

I hold the door open for any one, man, woman, child. I say please and thank you. I offer to help when I can. I make no distinction between male or female in being mannerly. If I'm a sexist because of that well I'll burn in hell but I'll still do it.