|
|
|
|
|
| |
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 4:13:37 PM |
Emotional intelligence is a euphemism for a derisive.
Meaning if you aren't behaving in a predetermined pattern, you aren't cultured in etiquette.
That is a bit like saying Asperger Syndrome is a euphanism for ADD. I'm not only talking about Gardner's Multiple Intelligence theory. Evidence is now very strong that expresive deficiencies such as Alexithymia can have physical causes (consider the work with the Romanian orphanages).
Also, it is not quite true that if something is innate it doesn't have to be taught. Language seems to be an innate aspect our our brains, we are born wired for the potential. However, failure to develope it at an early enough age may have physical implications for later developement of the skill.
Some people appear to simply be socially retarded, and there are many possible causes for such a condition ranging from what you call lack of conditioning all the way to Autism.
Some people do as they please.... some people are sociopaths.
I'm not completely sure I am clear on how the brief music history lesson you present relates to the subject, but having been a music major myself I'll bite.... and even help make your case by giving some vocabulary that people can Google if they wish to look into it further. While harmony did exist prior to the era of Plainsong, the Catholic church did discourage it for a time. After plainsong the musical genre that started using harmony was called Florid Organum (two voices that implied chords with different lines of melody) and then later the Motet (Google Machaut for some good examples).
A small correction, the Harmonic Minor isn't a mode, it is a scale. The mode is the Aeolian. The difference may be essentially splitting hairs since we are talking about the same notes, but the application is slightly different. I'm not sure which one you meant as the Diminished 7.
I think what you are driving at is that inspite of what we are used to there are forms of music that use different structures. This is surely true... though they generally all use "structure" to make music and there are similarities that often cross those culture bounderies. Harmony takes structure, though that structure can be very fluid even in western music such as Bebop. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you? Escape from POF Purgatory!!!
Posted: 8/9/2009 4:22:03 PM |
Do me a favor and save your pyscho analysis speech for the next person that cares. Im gonna make this very simple for you. If you are bothered by such sarcastic comments from others, then either don't read, or even reply to it. That shouldn't be to hard to comprehend now, right?
*lol* I was the one being "sarcastic", Mr Jacob. I am not sure you understand what that word really means. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 4:38:44 PM |
was there any "harmony" in choirs
After this part of your sentence, .....I went from  (in the headlights) to  to waking up and still seeing that "wordy concerto" to  Actually....you made me laugh. It was funny. My head is still swimming.
Ummm....I do know what brass instruments are, woodwind intruments are and percussion... When I made my little analogy of musical instruments and harmony, I didn't expect this! I concede that you have an extensive amount of musical knowledge and will never debate you on that...ever. I am impressed.
Are there rules that are not meant to be broken?
Back to topic....
Women in certain cultures were "taught" to "behave" a certain way. All the silly things like walking with a book on her head, to lifting her pinky when she sipped her tea.
These are not "innate", as had been proven with all the "grace schools" and such. If it was "innate" it wouldn't have to be taught
That is culture. Culture is social. It only lasts a few years. Not enough time to influence our inner drives.
Somehow, we have to listen to what the majority say. You have heard what women have to say about chivalry on this thread. Even if you question it, IT JUST IS.
I have listened to what men have liked forever. I don't question it. IT JUST IS.
They only want a sammich...
Edit to below: Is that second verse?
Edit #2 to below: Do you ever accept things that just are...e.g. trees, rocks, grass, women who like chivalry, musical instruments that play only certain sounds... | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 4:43:34 PM | Emotional intelligence is a euphemism for a derisive.
Meaning if you aren't behaving in a predetermined pattern, you aren't cultured in etiquette. That is a bit like saying Asperger Syndrome is a euphanism for ADD.
I get what you're saying. I should have framed it more to indicate that manners and chivalry are predetermined patterns, that are not innate...
I'm not completely sure I am clear on how the brief music history lesson you present relates to the subject,
Well, you want to cite History. There's a lot of ground to cover.
I merely wanted to indicate how people were expected to conform to "rigid" etiquettes, merely a few centuries ago, in the land of Kings and Queens.
It was a time of zealots, dictators and strong oppression. I don't know why it is romanticized so much.
A small correction, the Harmonic Minor isn't a mode, it is a scale. The mode is the Aeolian.
Incorrect. The Aeolian is a mode, and often referred to as "Natural minor", as it has a "natural" 7. It is the 6th mode of the diatonic (Greek) scale, before the Locrian mode. It is also known as the "relative" minor to the "key".
The "Harmonic minor" is a "synthetic" scale, with the "sharp 7", also known as a "leading" tone.
In the key of C (or it's relative minor "A"), same denotation at the staff (no sharps or flats) all the modes in the key are the white keys on the piano.
"A" harmonic minor would have the G#(black key) as the 7, while "A" Aeolian (or natural minor) would have the G natural (white key) as the 7.
Dimished 7 is a synthetic (4 note) scale as well. It's not really a scale, so much as a "broken chord". It is simply a dimished scale based on a triad of minor 3rds with and added 7th. Bach's music is laden with it. Particularly his organ works.
That is culture. Culture is social.
Duh....
It only lasts a few years. Not enough time to influence our inner drives.
That's why I'm debating on why some people feel the need to resurrect something from a few centuries ago. Chivalry is derived from the French word "chevalier", or Horseman, which was centuries ago.
Our inner drives are primal. and have nothing to do with "chivalry", which is a social conditioning.
Even if you question it, IT JUST IS.
Spoken like a true academic....
I don't question it. IT JUST IS.
That's your business.
The difference being, is that I was taught that I should question "everything".
| |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 4:59:01 PM | And rules are meant to be broken...
if rules are meant to be broken, then isn't the breaking of rules to become the new rule?
so then isn't it ok to break that one too?
Edit:
I'm a romantic, and I more than acknowledge it. In fact, the romantics I am talking about seek to refine it, to live it as a path, to experience it as a means of growth. I didn't mean to reduce the subject to an academic discourse, in reality the romantic side of courtly impetus is dripping with eroticism. Most women are lucky to get 10 minuts of forplay... the real gentleman can keep her going all day. Some people are looking for something more sublime and intense in their lovemaking, just as some people aren't happy with MacDonalds as their food. I'll take the venison roast in charred pine nuts and a bleu cheese sauce, thanks. :)
I want his menu :) (talking about more than physical, talking about across the board. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:02:26 PM | Verityone... two things.
I think I realized which mode you mean with the Diminished 7. Are you talking about the Locrian since the chord from the tonic note is half diminished? (-7b5)
Also wanted to add...
The "romantics" simply don't want to acknowledge it.
I'm a romantic, and I more than acknowledge it. In fact, the romantics I am talking about seek to refine it, to live it as a path, to experience it as a means of growth. I didn't mean to reduce the subject to an academic discourse, in reality the romantic side of courtly impetus is dripping with eroticism. Most women are lucky to get 10 minuts of forplay... the real gentleman can keep her going all day. Some people are looking for something more sublime and intense in their lovemaking, just as some people aren't happy with MacDonalds as their food. I'll take the venison roast in charred pine nuts and a bleu cheese sauce, thanks. :) | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:13:39 PM | "if rules are meant to be broken, then isn't the breaking of rules to become the new rule? "
But isn't the rule something that's clearly defined - a custom, a regulation - and doesn't 'breaking of rules' usually mean to get away from the defined and think out of the box? So, wouldn't a breaking of a rule by doing something not pre-determined be the opposite of a rule? Isn't it more of an option than and suggestion and not the norm?
Sorry, couldn't help myself ;-) | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:14:36 PM | I'm a romantic, and I more than acknowledge it. In fact, the romantics I am talking about seek to refine it, to live it as a path, to experience it as a means of growth.
Dood, I got fricken' oodles of romance! Is that what you mean? 
Seriously, that's why I was talking about ambiguities earlier. The terms have become so hackneyed that they're all intertwined.
"And rules are meant to be broken..." if rules are meant to be broken, then isn't the breaking of rules to become the new rule? so then isn't it ok to break that one too? :)
You know it! There are no rules....  | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:14:47 PM |
I'm a romantic, and I more than acknowledge it. In fact, the romantics I am talking about seek to refine it, to live it as a path, to experience it as a means of growth. I didn't mean to reduce the subject to an academic discourse, in reality the romantic side of courtly impetus is dripping with eroticism. Most women are lucky to get 10 minuts of forplay... the real gentleman can keep her going all day. Some people are looking for something more sublime and intense in their lovemaking, just as some people aren't happy with MacDonalds as their food. I'll take the venison roast in charred pine nuts and a bleu cheese sauce, thanks. :)
Oh my! I just felt a lovely flush go right through my body when I read this.
Temperature is up.
Now...I wonder...is this an innate response...or was I socially conditioned for this?
Ponder......the first time I read a romance book was a Harlequin when I was 10 yrs. old. When I came to the part of them fiercely fighting and then he grabs her and kisses her passionately, I just about went into orbit. This is from a girl who didn't even have TV in her life and did farmchores and schoolwork around the clock in the house that didn't have electricity or love. How did my body know that this was yummy?
There are many other times that men have done things (chivalry and good manners) that have me go like jello. Is that conditioned? No. I just really liked it! | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:20:34 PM | Oops, posting at the same time there. I would have answered these on the same post I just wrote had I known.
I get what you're saying. I should have framed it more to indicate that manners and chivalry are predetermined patterns, that are not innate...
Would it make more sense then to say that the potential for chivalry is innate?
Incorrect. The Aeolian is a mode, and often referred to as "Natural minor", as it has a "natural" 7. It is the 6th mode of the diatonic (Greek) scale, before the Locrian mode. It is also known as the "relative" minor to the "key".
The "Harmonic minor" is a "synthetic" scale, with the "sharp 7", also known as a "leading" tone.
Partly correct. Momentary brain fart on my part.... the natural minor has tthe same notes as the Aeolian. However, while you are right that the mode is often called the "natural minor" (even in some text books) it is technically incorrect to do so. The mode and the scale are not the same thing.... though again, I admit it may be splitting hairs.
Well, you want to cite History. There's a lot of ground to cover.
I merely wanted to indicate how people were expected to conform to "rigid" etiquettes, merely a few centuries ago, in the land of Kings and Queens.
It was a time of zealots, dictators and strong oppression. I don't know why it is romanticized so much.
I agree, it would have been a crappy time to live *lol*. Just for the record, the Occitan movement keep bringing up would not be the "sheeple", they were most definately the counter culture and some of them paid for it. In a time of sexual oppression esoteric eroticism was not always well recieved. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:31:26 PM | For those who have been following the thread I would further my point. I read a study that one who is not given the tools for emotional intelligence at a very young age will never have it Emotional intelligence is a euphemism for a derisive. Meaning if you aren't behaving in a predetermined pattern, you aren't cultured in etiquette.
I agree with the derisive and see nothing wrong with noting the former posts with this observation.
EI is more than etiquette. Many behaviorists and Freud agree that a child’s personality is fully formed by the time he is five years old. I believe that is what cd alluded too. After that you may influence, refine, cultivate and educate one but you may not change their core.
Other qualities are innate, you cannot make someone more intelligent, just better educated. Contrary to innate intelligence which can be tested, other innate qualities cannot. The gifted pianist is acknowledged only as he displays his talents; yet, his gift is innate. You can give one who is not musically inclined all the piano lessons in the world and he will never become another Beethoven.
I believe the propensity for chivalry and gentility is innate. And if not innate, as we’ve only our own experiences and opinions to measure this by, it must be acquired at a very young age. After this period you may polish all you want but their rough core will come through. It is a problem that many persons deal with on a regular basis; the gross misconception that they can change someone’s behavior by merely pointing it out and asking them to change. They cannot. The rough, tough guy may curb his lack of manners and coarseness for a while but it will come out in a multitude of other ways that indicate his resentment for not being accepted as who he is.
Till the corset goes flying off. Then it's back to "nature", and what is really "innate".
Everybody "knows" what really goes on behind closed doors. Why the need to disguise that?
Unfortunately, when it comes to sexual behavior that innate urge to mate can be curtailed by social mores and religious teachings so that even the sexiest persons pretend not to like or engage in certain sexual behaviors although behind closed doors.
However, once more I contend that IMO certain individuals are sensual while others are not. Take a man who is a great lover; he can find himself with someone who is totally non-responsive. Don’t get me wrong she may enjoy the orgasm but not the venue. Once again an area that leads to great frustration for the partner who is sensual. The Kama Sutra, videos and other techniques are brought into play to no avail. She will merely go through the motions in order to attempt to meet his level of sensuality. But, every once in a while an, “Are you done yet?” will hit him like a lightening bolt and rather than bring her up to his sensuality, his will wane. Dr. Phil tells the man, if it is a man, that he is at fault and encourages him to wash the dishes. Not all persons are sensual any more than not all persons are intellectually gifted. These are both innate qualities. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:52:01 PM |
However, once more I contend that IMO certain individuals are sensual while others are not. Take a man who is a great lover; he can find himself with someone who is totally non-responsive. Don’t get me wrong she may enjoy the orgasm but not the venue. Once again an area that leads to great frustration for the partner who is sensual. The Kama Sutra, videos and other techniques are brought into play to no avail. She will merely go through the motions in order to attempt to meet his level of sensuality. But, every once in a while an, “Are you done yet?” will hit him like a lightening bolt and rather than bring her up to his sensuality, his will wane. Dr. Phil tells the man, if it is a man, that he is at fault and encourages him to wash the dishes. Not all persons are sensual any more than not all persons are intellectually gifted.
Yeesh!!!! That hit a bit too close to actual experience to be comfortable! *lol* And let me add that since I prefer that people leave my kitchen alone unless they have some idea what they are doing (my knives and cookware don't go in the dishwasher), I usually wind up being the one who cooks AND washes dishes. ;) | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:58:07 PM |
Many behaviorists and Freud agree that a child’s personality is fully formed by the time he is five years old.
I'm familiar with that, and I agree that certain base characteristics are deeply entrenched, but not fully formed.
Remorse, for example, is not innate in a baby, nor a child. It is a characteristic of an adult who has evolved, and become aware of how actions permeate. A child is mostly incapable of such vision and foresight, without conditioning.
Other qualities are innate, you cannot make someone more intelligent, just better educated.
I'll disagree with that as well. Although mostly physiological, intelligence is also partly skill, which can be elevated. You can learn to improve your ability to reason deductively.
However, once more I contend that IMO certain individuals are sensual while others are not.
I won't disagree with you entirely. Some people are simply repressed, but tremendously sexual and sensual. Repression is very powerful. Some people are simply fearful of sexuality, and can be brought out of their shells.
Many women can go decades before they feel comfortable enough and knowledgable about their bodies, and suddenly discover orgasms that they never knew their bodies were capable of. Which fed the myth from the old Masters and Johnson studies that a woman's (physiological) sexual peak was in her 40's, while a man's was in his late teens.
It was simply not factoring in the "psychological" factor of repression in younger women, who didn't learn about their physiology through self stimulation. Remember, it was a man who invented the "vibrator" in order to help doctors who were treating female patients for female "hysteria". | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 6:03:29 PM | When you are nice to women, they step all over you. You land in the "friend" zone. There are of course a few women left that respect you, but overall so many women are different today, that NO MATTER WHAT THE WOMEN HERE SAY, it's more important WHAT THEY DO OFFLINE. If you are too nice, you lose. Many women look at you like you are retarded or something.
However once I find that good woman, I will spoil her with affection and being good to her. | |
|
| |
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 8:19:39 PM |
Yeesh!!!! That hit a bit too close to actual experience to be comfortable!
Sorry cd; but, thanks for acknowledging my point.
Remorse, for example, is not innate in a baby, nor a child.
One cannot see characteristics in a baby…..
But in a child, remorse is certainly visible. Very young children are very likely to say, “I’m sorree” and do it quite routinely. They often accompany this “remorse” with tears as they are very genuine in their feelings, of remorse.
Other qualities are innate, you cannot make someone more intelligent, just better educated. I'll disagree with that as well.
I realize that it is politically incorrect to state that some are more intelligent than others; but it is a fact that cannot be denied or we’d all be functioning on Einstein’s level. Of course one cans sharpen skills but that has nothing to do with natural intelligence.
Repression is an entirely different matter from my opinion that sensuality is innate.
To persons that are not sensual once the orgasm is achieved it is usually all over for them. Certain sexual activities are engaged in for the sake of pleasing the other. But, that joy, that feeling of insatiability, that a sensual person usually has for a lover, is missing. It takes a sensual person to realize that another is not. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 8:45:11 PM |
if rules are meant to be broken, then isn't the breaking of rules to become the new rule?
so then isn't it ok to break that one too? :)
You know it! There are no rules....
We did it; we actually agreed on something :) | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 9:46:02 PM | I'll repeat this for the 1000th time: "Chivalry is dead and feminism killed it"
Chivalry is a form of "noblesse oblige". It is man's recognition of the fairer, and weaker sex. He is cherishing her femininity which reaffirms his manhood. It's like the yin yang, one feeds the other. Feminism says women can do whatever men do, thus making it a contest.
After dating hundreds of women and having my heart broke more than a few times, the feminist ideals I was programmed with growing up have been beaten out of me. I realize that no matter what the raging femi-Nazi claims, she wants a man who is dominant over her. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/9/2009 11:44:46 PM | | ^^^Read "Sexual Utopia in Power" by Roger Devlin. You can google it. It goes deep into explaining the current moral dilemma of feminism in western civilization and what men need to do to change it. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/10/2009 1:39:57 AM |
It is a problem that many persons deal with on a regular basis; the gross misconception that they can change someone’s behavior by merely pointing it out and asking them to change. They cannot. The rough, tough guy may curb his lack of manners and coarseness for a while but it will come out in a multitude of other ways that indicate his resentment for not being accepted as who he is.
I haven't seen a Star Trek reference around here for ages, so let me throw this out:
"It was far easier for you as civilized men to behave like barbarians than it was for them as barbarians to behave like civilized men."
- Spock, , in the epidsode "Mirror, Mirror", explaining to Kirk how the mirror versions of the crew were so quickly spotted
This is the reason why civilization is fragile.
Chivalry is dead and feminism killed it
People on this thread have repeatedly brought up "respect"... One of the most fundamental aspects of second wave feminism was a profound disrespect for men and masculinity -- ironically at the same time they wanted male careers and the freedom to engage in male style patterns of short-term commitment-free sex, but that's another thread.
When the whole public code of chivalry towards women was changed from a woman's privilege to a woman's oppression, the entire system began to break down. That's how feminism killed chivalry. Maybe it would have turned out differently if there had been more dissident female voices from those who realized what the implications and consequences would be, but there weren't and the damage was done, and seems to persist in the culture, lots of it now being institutionalized.
As a result, as more and more men experience the numerous little pinpr1cks of disrespect aimed at them which are circulating in the culture, the average man begins to get the impression that the average woman cares only about herself and how things affect her, and really has very little interest in cultivating an atmosphere of mutual basic respect.
The total disregard which both feminists and lots of average women have shown for men, their feelings, and their needs for the past several decades has destroyed a huge reserve of generalized goodwill toward the average woman which the average man used to have several decades ago. Just as the average woman has tended to overspend her income and borrow on her (monetary) credit cards, the average woman has also emptied out her “emotional” bank account and maxed out her credit line with men. For a lot of average men, it has become a pay-as-you-go situation.
It will likely take several more decades for this reservoir of goodwill to be refilled even after all the dam leaks and drawdown problems are remedied, which can't occur until they're at least acknowledged. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/10/2009 8:37:08 AM |
People on this thread have repeatedly brought up "respect"... One of the most fundamental aspects of second wave feminism was a profound disrespect for men and masculinity -- ironically at the same time they wanted male careers and the freedom to engage in male style patterns of short-term commitment-free sex, but that's another thread.
The total disregard which both feminists and lots of average women have shown for men, their feelings, and their needs for the past several decades has destroyed a huge reserve of generalized goodwill toward the average woman which the average man used to have several decades ago. Just as the average woman has tended to overspend her income and borrow on her (monetary) credit cards, the average woman has also emptied out her “emotional” bank account and maxed out her credit line with men. For a lot of average men, it has become a pay-as-you-go situation.
It's ironic, it was the profound lack of respect towards women by men that actually founded feminism. Her contribution (24/7 work done solely to make sure that her man could freely do his job without worries, if she did work not get paid a fraction of what he did for the exact same job, be accused of being "kept" when she worked literally day, evening and weekend for free with no downtime, no help and no appreciation, she was called "emotional", "illogical", "not as smart", "moody" "not as capable", "weak", to name a few.
Look at the stereotypes in the second paragraph above.
A woman overspends her income? This is only true of women? some of the biggest tightwads I've ever known are women, and many of the most out of control spenders I know are men. And the opposite is true. that is TOTALLY an individual trait; it has nothing WHATSOEVER to do with gender. Feminism in its inheirent form was designed to break women's oppression, and give women a chance to be treated with respect as PEOPLE, not as women. It was a way of giving her a chance in spite of stereotypes, assumptions (which in looking at the many, many, many generalizations, nasty labels, extremely derogatory assumptions in this thread alone, proves that the respect still is not there; and it is the very individuals who are decrying the lack of female respect towards men that are the MOST disrespectful towards women themselves, which is continuing the cycle.
I will admit that there is a bent towards "man jokes" and I personally am uncomfortable around them. I have found many men extremely capable in all areas, even teh domestic ones they are given no credit for knowing a lick about, and I credit them for that and don't feel it's fair to paint a brush across the entire spectrum.
that being said, there are also a TON of "women jokes", many many many of which are quoted by the very people in here who are so upset about lack of male respect, not understanding that it is this very thinking that causes the reaction the other way.
Respect cannot be given by some women until it is given TO women, and the more angry and bitter men get for the scales turning back on them from what was a huge huge societal problem (still is a problem, but not nearly as much as it used to be), things will never be fixed.
As long as it is generalities, as long as it is "all women" and "all men", as long as every single woman is painted with the same brush as a few who are bitter and angry, just like if every man is painted with the same brush as a few who are bitter and angry, things will cotninue to cycle, the disrespect, the escalating bitterness, lashing out, angry mannerless classless treatment and the resentment, will fester and cause things within people of both genders that will keep the other gender uncomfortable and awkward in individual interactions; because they will be punishing the one for the sins oof what they assume are the "rest".
I do respect men. i think they are all individuals, I think they all have tremendous gifts, and they also have tihngs they have a tougher time with AS INDIVIDUALS. But what to me is a strength might to them be a weakness and vice versa, so even that is solely my interpretation.
I also respect women. i think all are individuals. i thikn we have tremendous gifts, we also have tihngs we have a toughter time with AS INDIVIDUALS, not generally.
And I do not share the disrespect towards men that some of culture feeds, so I do not feel it's fair to be punished for that mindset; any more than if a person is sitting 100 feet away from a person who breaks a window; does that person by the fact they are geographically close, still have to bear the consequences?
Entitlement princesses, feminazis, these are emotionally charged, angry, bitter words designed to disrespect overtly and with disdain.
How can a person who utters them in any way expect to be treated with respect, when they have never bothered to understand what a person behind a label they are besstowing without knowing ANYTHING about that person?
Feminism is the final giving of rights to them as PEOPLE in a culture that devalued, disrespected and disdained women's contributions before, as well as them as a people as a whole (which continues to this very day; several posts in this thread are rife with the hostile disrespect).
Chivalry has nothing whatsoever to do with feminism. Because it was not a woman's "right" to be treated with respect, gentleness and courtliness in the social setting. It was a privilege, bestowed by a man who wanted her to feel cherished. As a woman.
Nothing to do with societal devaluing. It was completely separate and it was about his showing value to her as a woman. Not a person. Mind you there were places where the behavior was expected and that is not what I'm talking about, the "having" to stand when a woman entered, I'm talking about the one on one between two idnividuals in a social private setting.
I personally still like that. I think a person bothering to show value, show respect, do manners that elevate both up just a little higher, to me it's classy, it's romantic, it's elegant, and it's a breath of fresh air in these days where the gender roles are so blurred they are almost invisible on the social side because of the changes on the economic and professional side.
And she, as a WOMAN, can then turn around and show value to him as a man in her own special way; again not for any reason except it makes her feel good to know that it is all about give and take (NOT, as so many in here are bound and determined to believe, as just take as her due and sit there offering nothing whatsoever in return), and her celebrating being a woman, even when what a woman is has changed so much in assumptions, expectations and lifestyle, (though not in receiving of respect, blowing away of labels and finally being free of those hostile stereotypes that have followed us around for centuries; those are still obviously lacking a lot; though there has been some improvement).
We have value as people. They have value as people.
But in a one on one dating, it is not "us and them".
it is "me" and "him".
And he is one man, one individual, with one mind, one personality and one outlook.
He represents himeslf. I represent myself. And in that context we can do whatever hte heck we want, because it feels good to us to do that. Without "society", "current culture", "past cultural sins", anything whatsoever hanging over our head forcing us to act or react in any way at all whatsoever. If that means not opening a car door, who the heck cares? If it means he does? I appreciate it a lot, and will do something back to show I value his courtliness.
because I appreciate the living daylights out of it.
I don't demand it. Because it is not an expected right. It is a privelege bestowed by an individual confident within himself that he wants to bestow it without worrying about what he is saying or implying; just that he wants to show he values her. Nothing more; totally and completely without premeditation, without manipulation, because he is comfortable in his own skin as a man and has no problem showing value to her as a woman. Without worrying whether or not she will show value back.
And if he's with a good woman, he will have that reciprocated in kind. Because with a good woman, they will give back; not just take.
It's all good. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/10/2009 9:19:12 AM | ^^^Like most women, you have bought into the idea that feminism was an organic movement - it wasn't:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRjF_ZZI7XY
It was funded by the Rockefellers to destabilize society by making the state the daddy and making the real daddy irrelevant - you can see their success all around you. Believe it or not, your mothers and grandmothers weren't depressed or oppressed by being domesticated. They were, in fact, a lot happier than the modern "independent" woman.
Sheesh! I could spend the next 15 minutes deconstructing all the nonsense you put forth, like women are tighter with money - HA!!
I just don't have the time and at this point, my goal is to educate the men since we got ourselves into this mess, and now we have to get ourselves out of it. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/10/2009 9:27:15 AM |
When you are nice to women, they step all over you. You land in the "friend" zone. There are of course a few women left that respect you, but overall so many women are different today, that NO MATTER WHAT THE WOMEN HERE SAY, it's more important WHAT THEY DO OFFLINE. If you are too nice, you lose. Many women look at you like you are retarded or something.
^^^This is exactly what I mean. F*ck with being nice already. Better off being an A**hole, but of course to each their own.
Either that, or you can just be some chics personal doormat.
Right. No one will care about you if you don't care about yourself. It is ok to care about her needs, but you have to put yours first. It should be your priority to make sure that both of your needs are being met. And if she doesn't like that, then find someone who does. You don't have to treat people like crap, but don't put up with any crap yourself. | |
|
| How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/10/2009 9:56:00 AM |
When the whole public code of chivalry towards women was changed from a woman's privilege to a woman's oppression, the entire system began to break down. That's how feminism killed chivalry. Maybe it would have turned out differently if there had been more dissident female voices from those who realized what the implications and consequences would be, but there weren't and the damage was done, and seems to persist in the culture, lots of it now being institutionalized.
I was and am one of those dissident voices. Here on Pof and IRL.
I am a romantic; chivalry with its accompanying gentility is of paramount importance to me. I adore the alpha superiorly intellectual male. It has been my experience that these men can and do practice, at least, genteel ways. Some women can put up with coarse, crass men; I cannot tolerate them, I know, I have tried.
Without taking this off topic, I can say that I agree with your thoughts. The feminization of America has done a great deal of damage. One aspect of feminization has resulted in giving women jobs that they are not capable of fully carrying out, police and fire departments, for example. This also places an additional tax burden on the citizens for these token positions and leaves the public vulnerable when the person responding cannot help them.
When women demanded that the Civil Rights Act be applicable to them also, an act meant to help right the wrongs of slavery and segregation for African Americans; every other group of persons including deviants employed this act to their benefit……..
Except for the healthy white American male. This is the only group that is not protected under this act.
It will likely take several more decades for this reservoir of goodwill to be refilled even after all the dam leaks and drawdown problems are remedied, which can't occur until they're at least acknowledged.
I do not think that will ever happen, women have gotten accustomed to token positions in jobs they cannot properly fulfill; I do not see them giving that up anytime soon.
if she did work not get paid a fraction of what he did for the exact same job,
Yet, in order to obtain jobs most women were not capable of performing, police and fire departments had to lower their physical requirements in order to hire women. Women are now routinely given these jobs and paid the same salary as men although the women are not holding up their end of the bargain. These jobs often require brute strength; if there were women that had this strength then fine give them the jobs. But to have firefighters that are incapable of rescuing and carrying others imperils the very persons they were hired to protect.
This is a primary example of feminism; just because I want it I get to have it; even if I am not qualified.
Feminism in its inheirent form was designed to break women's oppression, and give women a chance to be treated with respect as PEOPLE, not as women.
Give me a break. In America women were oppressed? I call bs on that; it was merely a guise by man-haters to devalue men, even on a physical level. “We can do anything a man can”, is a mantra of feminists.
Want to try rescuing the guy above you from a burning building? You can’t but men like him go without work in order that the fems be given token jobs in the police, fire departments and the construction industry. They are paid equally to the men that can and actually perform the work. But feminists refuse to see the injustice in this. No it’s all good if it is a woman demanding anything. The fact is that by women demanding and then taking on every single aspect of the workplace, men now have less jobs available to them. Most men will not perform jobs seen as typically female.
Men, functioning as police men, chivalrous as they are, feel protective of most of the women they get partnered with; which places their own lives in peril.
Believe it or not, your mothers and grandmothers weren't depressed or oppressed
+1 | |
|
|
| Page 19 of 21
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 |
|
Home
login 
