One needn't fail to feel genuine sympathy for the victims of a stupid showboating Italian cruiseship captain to nevertheless be amused at the complaints from women who suddenly find they aren't so keen on that all-important equality when push comes to shove:Every choice has a price. As VD says, (Western, and especially Anglo-American) women have consistently and constantly scorned and hated and belittled men and masculinity since early in the 20th century. This is an example of the price.
...
This was not so much predictable as predicted. Women have methodically attacked the concept of male duty and honor through every possible means for the past ninety years, and now they are whining that they don't get special treatment simply because a ship happens to be sinking. ...
Those big, burly crewmen shoving aside women as they prioritized their own escape should have been wearing t-shirts that said "this is what a feminist looks like". Enjoy the crash.
I'd bet that under normal circumstances the vast majority of those "big, burly crewmen shoving aside women as they prioritized their own escape" are indeed 'feminists'; that is, that they would be among the first of persons to viciously attack a traditional man, such as myself, as a "knuckle-dragging troglodyte".
I rarely bother with even trying to read the comments on VD' blog, but here are two comments I'd like to share with Gentle Reader (emphasis added):
alexamenos: ...
b) A very common theme in the Mail article comments is that it's perfectly fine that the men didn't help those oh so able and independent women, but those men were quite deplorable in not sacrificing themselves for the elderly and, of course, the cheeeeldren.
This is an understandable view, but I think it misses the bigger picture: You can't change a man's role in society without....
....wait for it....
...changing a man's role in society.
A society can tell it's men that 'we appreciate, respect, and reward your strength and ability to respect and provide for women and children', or it can chose to tell it's men, 'it's all you're goddamned fault, stop acting like men.' Whichever message it is that a society delivers, the society shouldn't be surprised to learn that it can't pick and choose the behaviors it desires at its whim.
Alternatively stated, blaming these men for not helping the children and elderly is a bit like blaming an insurance company for not paying on a claim when you never paid the premium in the first place. If you want men to be prepared to sacrifice [themselves for the good of others, strangers no less], you better pay up front.
Stickwick: You reap what you sow.
The really crappy thing for some of us women is that we get the same treatment even though we respect and honor men and desire the traditional roles. I think I'll punch a feminist in the nose today.
4 comments:
Perhaps it's not 'special treatment' the women and children wanted but simple human kindness.
Perhaps it's not 'special treatment' the women and children wanted but simple human kindness.
So the men were receiving this, but the women and children weren't?
Also, "simple human kindness"? Letting someone go ahead of you in the checkout line because you have 20 items and they have 1 is simple human kindness.
Deciding that, while a boat is tipping over and everyone is running for their lives, the women and children should be allowed to be saved first/prioritized and the men should put their lives second, isn't simple human kindness. It's something else.
As Crude points out, intentionally sacrificing your own life so to save someone else's life -- especially someone you don't even know -- isn't "simple human kindness". Such an attitude -- and moreover, the ability to carry through should the situation ever arise, rather than to panic (which is what comes normally/naturally to most persons) -- has to be intentionally cultivated.
And even "simple human kindness" doesn't come naturally to most persons. For example, the traffic grid-lock which is becoming more and more common, is due entirely to individual selfishness.
Post a Comment