Saturday, April 9, 2011

Men Don't Like Harpies, Men Like ...

My wife and I have been reading about and discussing game quite a bit recently.  OneSTDV and several other right-wing bloggers have written on the subject.  Then Cassandra Goldman wrote a post about young men that sent my thinking off on a sharp tangent.  The question that formed was:
Why do men complain so much about shrews, harpies, bitches, castrators, etc., without mentioning or perhaps even thinking about the opposite?  We talk about the opposite of ugly women, dumb women, unavailable women, slutty women, etc., so what gives?

Part of the problem, surely, is the obsolescence of the phrase "nice girl".  It means any number of things other than "woman who is respectful, mature, and supportive", so we run into the very same Missing Term Problem I point out in so many discussions.  But that only tells half of the story.  I'm convinced that the reason men don't talk about how they desire to meet, associate with, and marry nice women is that it involves admitting, to themselves as much as the world, that they want to be treated well, emotionally speaking.  

A woman can be pretty, smart, and virtuous in a vacuum, but for her to be nice requires someone to be nice to.  Obvious though it might be, if a man lets on that his anti-bitch attitude is matched by a pro-nice-woman attitude, he may be tagged as a wimp who fears roughness and demands to be coddled.  Nobody want to come home to put-downs, iciness, emotional instability, or a voice raised in anger.  

As an adolescent I remember listening to the other males judging the girls in our class, and I remember all of them carefully avoiding this topic.  Obviously they were highly focussed on appearance, but they seemed to pick around the topic of whether or not so-and-so was a backstabbing, trash-talking grouch.  It is not a surprise that boys don't know what they want, but it's a little distressing that the same macho complex has gamed so many older males into forgetting.

Gentleman, it is not a weakness or even an eccentricity to seek out a woman who is kind, considerate, sweet-talking, sweet-natured, and thoughtful.  These goals are laudable.  You don't prove that you're a tough guy by letting a woman cut you down constantly, but you don't prove you are a tough guy by out-bitching her either.  You just have to avoid that sort of person.  You should seek the sort of woman of strong enough character that she holds her tongue rather than vents anger at another person, of strong enough character that she would rather criticize than insult, and rather inform than criticize.  And you should be proud of that.

6 comments:

callowman said...

Like (as we say on Facebook).

m4monologue said...

test

m4monologue said...

Hmmm, sorry about that. I've been having troubles commenting at your blog. I sent you an email with my comment (not that it's anything special).

Just a suggestion, but maybe you could change up the comments options, like Mangans or OneSTDVs? The Wordpress option doesn't always seem to work for some reason.

Pat Hannagan

Justin said...

... sweet-hearts?

Olave d'Estienne said...

Here is Pat H's comment, in italics. (I am going to figure out a suitable solution to my comments policy.)

Yes, I think the truth is that most men want a stable and happy marriage with a woman who they love and care for. A woman to provide for and she, in return, to give him children and a home he loves to come back to each day.

But that is not how it is stated by men. And further, the majority of women have been taught to be repulsed and offended by such a notion.

So the world turns now between sluts and gamers squabbling over their turf and vanities.

I don't hear anything from the MRA or Gamers about what they could do to turn things around other than whinge and abuse women in the first instance or get on board the slut banging game in the latter.

A big part of the problem as I see it is co-education. Maybe that is a norm in America but it wasn't in Oz. Kindergarden to year 4 were co-ed. At year 4 the boys went to male only schools and the girls went to female only schools.

Not only has the education system itself become feminised and feminising, it forces boys and girls amongst each other creating a male/female hybrid of both sexes. The boys irrational and the girls promiscuous, amongst other things.

Olave d'Estienne said...

Coëducation bears a huge portion of the blame for the problems. The worship of mediocrity, the 13-year campaign to teach children and teenagers that they cannot produce anything of value, and are not expected to, etc. - these are the building blocks of the anti-civilization campaign.

Boys are feminized by women's rules and traumatized, in an almost indescribable, emotional-logical way, by the double binds therein. The boys who can follow rules have lower status - simple as that. The boys who seek to bond in a goal-oriented, basically egalitarian fashion with their allies have their work cut out for them. Much more common than teams are de facto gangs, savagely heirarchical, sadistic in nature and intent.

Turn them loose on the girls and the girls have a subtle trauma as well. Girls REALLY DON'T want to be around Beavis and Butthead seven hours a day, five days a week, year after year. (Neither do the more advance boys.) Girls bond with other girls, naturally, but it's silly to expect that bonding to be 100% healthy. After the process, monogamous romantic hopes seem nauseatingly naïve and, as you mentioned, girls flee from those hopes.

I could write about this all day. Maybe I will add more later.