I am the Patriarchy

originally posted by: CranialSponge
a reply to: FriedBabelBroccoli

So I take that as a no, but thanks for the holier than thou lecture.

[snip]

The entire populace is becoming politicians while I am asking for actual data and literature.

Any particular reason why you asked me, specifically, to produce data and literature on this feminist stuff ?

Because nowhere in my posts did I argue anything on this feminist thing, whatsoever.

My post was completely 100% all about pointing Les Mis to his illogical reaction to an anger inducing situation.



You've just made my case in point about the loss of logic, reason, and reading comprehension.

If that to you is "holier than thou", then so be it.

Ad hominems get you nowhere.

On the contrary, they seem to be quite popular in this thread. It would almost be comical if it wasn't such a fine example of what the OP was trying to point out in the first place. Everyone has moved on from the real issue of the original post to now claiming that LesMisanthrope "slammed the door" on someone, and almost injured her.

Laughable.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Everyone has moved on from the real issue of the original post to now claiming that LesMisanthrope "slammed the door" on someone, and almost injured her.

Laughable.

Allowing a door to close on someone "mid-stride" (as the OP specifically said) whilst they're carrying a bunch of bags, is risking the potential of injuring someone unintentionally.

Physically reacting to a situation, particularly in a fit of anger, is illogical and never "okay" due to the risks that may happen as a result. "Crap happens" as they say.

What if the door closing on this person mid-stride caused them to trip and smash their head on the floor ?



The OP allowed his emotions to override his logical reasoning.

Never a good thing.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
Men will not be subordinate? !!!

:-)

I could cry I'm laughing so hard -

Please, tell me so I can know too - what is the feminist belief system?

It's more accurately a mindset where men are viewed as the perpetual oppressors and women the eternal victims.

a reply to: CranialSponge

You seem like a fairly intelligent person, therefore I must ask you this: why can you not see the "forest from the trees" in the opening post? While you suggest a valid alternative to how the author of this thread could have handled the situation differently, it' s not really what the opening post was about.

The opening post is more about the mindset of certain feminists, where common courtesy and manners have been misinterpreted as man's desire to assert his dominance over women. "I am the Patriarchy" suggests the author felt like the woman was associating him with Patriarchy just because he is a man (guilt by association), something - sadly - certain feminists tend to do.

originally posted by: Dark Ghost
a reply to: CranialSponge

You seem like a fairly intelligent person, therefore I must ask you this: why can you not see the "forest from the trees" in the opening post? While you suggest a valid alternative to how the author of this thread could have handled the situation differently, it' s not really what the opening post was about.

The opening post is more about the mindset of certain feminists, where common courtesy and manners have been misinterpreted as man's desire to assert his dominance over women. "I am the Patriarchy" suggests the author felt like the woman was associating him with Patriarchy just because he is a man (guilt by association), something - sadly - certain feminists tend to do.

Mainly because the OP isn't recognizing his own conditioned reaction to this woman's conditioned assumption.

Both were in the wrong.


If I had a dime for every person that gave me an awkward sideways look for holding a door open for them and/or lack of saying "thank you" in appreciation for a common courtesy, I'd be living in a mansion on a hill drinking long island iced teas all day long.

Starting a thread and ranting about a select trivial number of certain individuals in the world, fueled by some anecdotal experiences, does not a well-balanced mindset make.

We cannot change the way some people think in this world, we can only change the way we react to their way of thinking.

a reply to: CranialSponge

So what do we do?

Take the insult from the ignorant women, while holding the door for her? what is this feminist fantasy to use men as doormats?


Sounds like it would fit perfect with the Feminist Agenda, get the entitlement that comes with being a female but still bash men.


If im holding the door and some idiot tells me "no thanks i can take care of it myself" you bet i will let go of that door. If they have the brain capacity to say such words, then they should know the consequences that will follow up. Of course unless they think that the man will hold the door for them even after they insulted him.

a reply to: CranialSponge

Instead, the only thing he accomplished was to reinforce this woman's mistaken assumption that the male gender is an ape still swinging from the trees and has yet to learn human-evolved "anger management" skills.

I can read just fine thanks. This is no one else's but your idea. This doesn't just come out of no where but your own head. This is the only thing I accomplished according to you, and no one else. This is your judgement: an ape who has yet to learn human-evolved anger management skills. I'm not even human. Unless you're claiming to speak for the woman? At least you admit it is a mistaken assumption, but strangely, you nonetheless see me as reinforcing it—not even in your head, but someone else's. Yeah right. How does one reinforce a mistaken assumption, if the mistaken assumption isn't already reinforced. How does obliging someone's concerns about my politeness equate to the entire male gender being an ape swinging from the trees? I mean these are your ideas; take responsibility.

a reply to: CranialSponge

Allowing a door to close on someone "mid-stride" (as the OP specifically said) whilst they're carrying a bunch of bags, is risking the potential of injuring someone unintentionally.

Physically reacting to a situation, particularly in a fit of anger, is illogical and never "okay" due to the risks that may happen as a result. "Crap happens" as they say.

What if the door closing on this person mid-stride caused them to trip and smash their head on the floor ?



The OP allowed his emotions to override his logical reasoning.

Of course, the door must have been a great thick steel door sure to annihilate all that it closes upon. Yeah, sorry. No such make believe exists. Also, no fits of anger were present. I was actually quite indifferent until I thought about it later. So let's not rely on our own conjectures too much. And the whole trip and fall and hit their head thing—what strange physics are you used to that this is a common occurrence? Or are you perpetuating the mistaken assumption that women cannot hold the door open for themselves? You're trying to make me guilty for a crime you can only imagine. No one was hurt. No one tripped and hit their head. No make-believe is necessary.

It seems like you too are guilty of allowing your emotions to override your logical reasoning. You're painting a picture of a make-believe world in an attempt to prove reality.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Here is what you said regarding the incident:

In apology for my oppressive act, I let the door go and it closed on her mid-stride, thereby allowing her to struggle with her shopping bags. I walked away in silence as she guffawed and shook her head in ironic indignation.

Do I detect a little note of sarcasm there? You must not have been completely indifferent during the incident, based on your description of letting the door go "in apology for your oppressive act." How did you know she struggled? You must have stayed around long enough to witness the aftermath of your action. Why would you do that? Maybe because you enjoyed seeing her struggle after she scolded you?

I agree with cranial sponge that you could have taken the higher road and made her feel like quite the heel if you had only said something like, "I'm so sorry - I thought I was just helping another human being out, I had no intention of dominating or oppressing you as a woman. Next time I'll be sure NOT to help someone out again, thanks for correcting me." You could have said this while continuing to hold the door so as not to catch her mid-stride. Believe me, that would have made you look like the nicest guy, and she would look like a raving nut bag. By closing the door on her mid-stride, you made yourself look just as rude as her, and you validated her warped opinion of men in general.

This is nothing new.

I was brought up to have good manners (in the main) and I ALWAYS hold the door open for ANYBODY within a few steps of the door I have just opened - yes even bankers and politicians!!!

I have only been called on it once and that was back in the 80's while i was at college. The lady in question told me i was a chauvinist pig and lots of other things.

Many other polite men I know who always hold open the door for anybody have also been verbally abused by the woman they had held the door open for.

So i can only assume that feminists think it's ok to hold the door open for a man but we must let it swing shut for a woman.

a reply to: johnb

Although I do not agree with the more extreme feminists, I think the whole "down with male chivalry" attitude comes from the old days of treating a woman like a frail petite flower: not strong enough to take care of herself, and not smart enough to handle employment or leadership of any kind. It all kind of rolled into one thought -- women can't really do much of anything for themselves. At the time feminism really started, the idea behind the movement was to change those attitudes towards women. The movement was about seeing women more as equals, and not the frail petite flowers who would get the "vapors" at the first sign of any difficulty. Things have improved a lot (at least in the Western world), but I guess there are a few extremists who balk at any perceived throw-back to those days. They mistakenly think that if a man holds a door open for a woman, then he will look at her as a weak, frail thing with not much of a brain. I personally don't agree that this is what a man is thinking when he holds a door open for a woman, but I am not an extremist.

Feminism was introduced as part of the NWO - designed to divide so the people are easier to conquer.
Saying that women are not able to do anything for themselves is a joke - who has managed households for years? My grandmother used to have to put my grandfathers clothes out each morning as well as run the bakery that she owned with my grandfather.

a reply to: kaylaluv

The funny part is, and im no way joking... i learned that Men are superior because of feminist.


Modern feminist with their out of world concept that i am...potential rapist, My penis is a weapon, and i should not be nice to women because it upset them. Sure fine by me.

I learned about this feminist craze about 7 yrs ago, ever since then, i started looking women differently(not in a good way).

Thanks feminist, you ruined women for me, never have i thought they were unequal to me, until recently.


You know what this incident(OP) would do to me? will make me think about holding doors to any females, even if they are not feminist... because why bother?... you know what this would create, more messed up Scotties lol, societies.

Feminist destroy society by making normal things into some taboo.

So holding door is sexism, what's next?
I guess this holding door is sexism is what the original women movement were fighting for huh? they are probably spinning in their grave.


Women should keep feminist in check if they want to keep their respect, cause a cornered dog will only run until he can't run any more, after that its only tooth and claws.

I found a rather interesting solution to this door issue, since it isnt exactly a rare event.

I walk through the door first, and then hold the door open behind me. This seems to make it okay for pretty much anyone and everyone. Not sure why it works so well so consistently, but.. such is life.

I am a bit amazed how posters substantiated the OPs claims, seemingly unwittingly.

Signed,
-Chauvinists for Equality

a reply to: kaylaluv

Do I detect a little note of sarcasm there? You must not have been completely indifferent during the incident, based on your description of letting the door go "in apology for your oppressive act." How did you know she struggled? You must have stayed around long enough to witness the aftermath of your action. Why would you do that? Maybe because you enjoyed seeing her struggle after she scolded you?

I agree with cranial sponge that you could have taken the higher road and made her feel like quite the heel if you had only said something like, "I'm so sorry - I thought I was just helping another human being out, I had no intention of dominating or oppressing you as a woman. Next time I'll be sure NOT to help someone out again, thanks for correcting me." You could have said this while continuing to hold the door so as not to catch her mid-stride. Believe me, that would have made you look like the nicest guy, and she would look like a raving nut bag. By closing the door on her mid-stride, you made yourself look just as rude as her, and you validated her warped opinion of men in general.

If I enjoyed people struggling with their bags, I wouldn’t have held the door open to begin with. She had two bags I think. She didn’t struggle in the slightest. My relating of the story was conceived after the fact. I didn’t close the door on her; I didn’t slam it in her face; I simply let go of the door I was holding open for her, which, apparently, she wanted me to do.

But you make an interesting point. I could have taken the high-road, whatever that may be. I could have taken the time to express a number of points in a rhetorical fashion, perhaps by belittling her methods or intellect or attitude in some sarcastic way, thereby resorting to the same methods she sought to inflict on strangers such as myself. Instead I gave her what she wanted. I didn’t “make myself look rude” because I wasn’t rude. I didn’t take the “high-road” and berate her for her actions or made her feel like a heel because doing so would only breed more confrontation. But neither did I turn the other cheek, which I think is insulting advice to those in the presence of bullies. Why would I try to make myself look like a nice guy? For vain reasons? Is holding the door open for a stranger not enough?

However I like that I’m on trial here. I would never see my self as a victim, but this is victim blaming.

a reply to: Serdgiam

Signed,
-Chauvinists for Equality

I like it. Perhaps a movement will grow out of it?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

If I enjoyed people struggling with their bags, I wouldn’t have held the door open to begin with. She had two bags I think. She didn’t struggle in the slightest. My relating of the story was conceived after the fact. I didn’t close the door on her; I didn’t slam it in her face; I simply let go of the door I was holding open for her, which, apparently, she wanted me to do.

First you said she struggled with her packages, and "guffawed in ironic indignation", now you say she didn't struggle in the slightest. I'm getting suspicious of your whole story now. How do we know that any of your story is true?

a reply to: Itisnowagain



Are you saying that there was no prevailing attitude "back in the day" that women didn't have the brains to think for themselves? This is just one example of what women were faced with back in the "good ole' days".

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The woman you shut in the door did not say "I am a feminist" (*nor did she say she was your mother) yet you reacted to her( rejection) by shutting the door on her .
This unkind act of yours was used as an opening for you to rant, reducing human beings to their gender.
You have not grasped or questioned why that the same concept "feminism" that you approved of for your mother now you disapprove of in woman. You label female human being as " feminists " and disapprove of them when you dress them up in your mothers ideology.


LesMisanthrope[/post]
" She had two bags I think. She didn’t struggle in the slightest. My relating of the story was conceived after the fact. I didn’t close the door on her"

The story is changing as you had told us that she did struggle.

LesMisanthrope[/post]." In apology for my oppressive act, I let the door go and it closed on her mid-stride, thereby allowing her to struggle with her shopping bag."

It's nothing a bit of therapy couldn't fix.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Now I'm a liar. You might want to read again. I said I "allowed her to struggle with her shopping bags", meaning I gave her the opportunity.