MRAs: The men who lost their lives protecting their girlfriends in the Aurora theater shooting were “suckers.”
Over on The Spearhead, the regulars are discussing the three young men who sacrificed their own lives to save their girlfriends in the chaos of the Aurora theater shootings.
Needless to say, many of them aren’t too keen on any act of heroism that might benefit a woman.
Here are the two highest-rated comments in the comment thread. (I have bolded some of the more egregious stuff.)
Young Guy writes:
Sacrifice was once expected of men and women, but it has only been expected of men since the social contract between men and women was torn up by feminists. Most women have been told their entire lives they can have it all, and their happiness is the most important thing in the universe, so most women hate the thought of having to give up anything or putting other people before themselves. Most relationships today are one-sided, so don’t be shocked when men shun marriage or take up pumping and dumping. That might sound harsh to some people, but most women did it to themselves.
Why should I give every ounce of my being for a woman when she is one bad mood away from tossing me onto the scrap heap? I have heard the horror stories from men who worked hard to provide for their families, only for it to mean nothing to their ungrateful ex-wives. I have seen men risk life and limb to protect women they loved, only to have the women in their lives leave them or forget about their sacrifices. It has been said men have obligations while women have options in our modern world, I and agree with that statement. Most women think the world is their oyster, and everyone should cater to them. Most men understand the world is a harsh place, and no one is going to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Most women have done an excellent job pissing away all the goodwill men had towards them. I look at women my age, and I realize almost none of them are relationship material. Their entitlement is through the roof. They almost never say “thank you.” They demand chivalry even though they think they should never have to return the favor. They have been told any man who stands up for himself is guilty of abuse. It really is too much to ask of most women to be pleasant, keep the house clean, take care of the kids, and realize a relationship isn’t the Disney fairy-tale which they have been brainwashed with since birth.
Nietzsche (presumably not the ghost of the real Nietzsche) is a bit more concise:
They saved their lives so the girlfriends can be screwing other dudes in several months time…….. probably much less. Heroism is a suckers game.
These two comments each got nearly two dozen upvotes, even though the thread is still young.
Some other highlights of the thread:
Peter South agrees with Nietzsche’s assessment, but expects the girlfriends to move on even more quickly:
These young women will don black for the rest of their lives to mourn and commemorate the passing of these great fallen heroes.
Well ok they’ll be twittering, texting and yakking on their “smart phones” within a week about other guys…
But I think we can all agree that men generally make great meat shields.
Phil, meanwhile, derides the heroes as “suckers.”
Those boyfriends were suckers. These men were living in the past. The boyfriends were living in the 1700′s while modern day American women are living in feminist 2012. Modern day American women don’t live by the old social contract. The problem is men like these three don’t understand. These women will find new boyfriends and move on with their lives. The three men are dead. Gone forever. They died believing is something that doesn’t exist. It is tragic and disgusting.
Eric adds:
the grrlz who survived are probably moving on to the next cock even as we speak. And I’ll bet the types of guys they’re moving on to won’t be the type who’d take a bullet for them either.
Meanwhile, the lowest-rated comment in the thread, with more than two dozen downvotes and only 6 upvotes, is a comment from Georice81 praising the heroes, which starts off with:
The Bible says that there is no Greater Love than when a man gives up his life so that another man may live. I believe in this no matter what anyone may say, MRA or Feminist.
What these men did was heroic and defines what a true man should be. It isn’t a question of being a white knight. It is a question of being a brave man and a true man at that.
I guess the Spearheaders are only fans of traditionalism when it benefits them personally.
Posted on July 23, 2012, in antifeminism, evil women, irony alert, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, the spearhead, thug-lovers. Bookmark the permalink. 546 Comments.
I am so glad you did this story, it has been on my mind sice the night it happend , and I was hoping somebody would put this out there., so thank you and I want to say one thing, back in 1996 I was beaten and stabbed eleven times , and lost one eye because I was and am a gay man and guess who came to my rescue ? straight white men ( so the called bullies of the feminist movement) , if it were not for them, I would be dead. . I will always stick up for straight men and am not one of those feminist flockers that other gay men support.
The statement, “These women will find new boyfriends and move on with their lives.” is presented as a bad thing. The commenters seem to think a person’s romantic life should end forever if they suffer the death of a partner. It seems like a very sad viewpoint to take.
Eventually yes-they will move on. Most people do not do what Queen Victoria did (and even then it was rumored she had a paramour in Mr. Brown after her beloved Alfred died) and spend the rest of their life in seclusion out of mourning their lost loved one.
Are they supposed to renounce romance love forever? I doubt that is what these men would want for their girlfriends.
Yet if these men had been called “suckers” by anyone else, MRAs would be yelling about misandry.
I was thinking similarly to princessbonbon and Fatman…since when is the grieving cycle a bad thing? I’m idly wondering what these MRAs would think of sati. I’ll file away the thought of how that discussion would go for future nightmares…yeesh.
Good for Georice81, though, in sticking to zir guns on believing that quotation and stating it against popular opinion. I’ve always been a fan of that one too.
Do these idiots realize that men aren’t the only ones to do that type of stuff? My sister used her body as a shield to protect her boyfriend from being stabbed a second time by a disturbed man who crashed her friend’s BBQ and attacked random people. Those people in the theater didn’t risk their lives out of a sense of obligation but a sense of love… Not that I expect any of those Spearhead losers to understand the concept.
Here’s a woman who risked her life to save another woman in the shooting: http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/23/us/colorado-theater-heroism-obama/index.html
Good people and bad people come in all genders, and crass sexual motivations have nothing to do with this.
Cliff et al, you’re even more deluded than I thought if you think this isn’t gendered. Obviously women can and are heroic, but it is very, very, very rare that you’ll see a reversal of the three examples presented here. Why? A combination of cultural and biological factors. Part of it- not all, but part- is indeed a culture that teaches men to put themselves last and to defend women at their own expense. Obviously these three are heroes. But there are also some larger facts behind it.
I’m sorry if that interferes with your male privilege fetish/misandrist/male Original Sin apple cart.
I can pretty heroically. Today I’m putting up pints of green beans like a boss.
/silly
I think the girlfriends of these guys will never stop thinking about them, even if and when they do eventually find new partners. And that’s exactly how these guys most likely wanted it. You don’t sacrifice your own life so that your loved one would throw away his/her by mourning indefinitely. No, you sacrifice yourself so that the other may keep living, and that means doing all those things that make life worth living. You sacrifice your own life because you love someone and want them to live a long, happy life. Else you would be protecting them for the wrong reasons in the first place. It’s not an insult to a dead partner’s memory to find someone new, on the opposite. It means their sacrifice was not in vain. Or can mean, if someone is truly happy without a new relationship that is also ok. But what does make it an insult to the dead person is to waste one’s life living it unhappily.
“a culture that teaches men to put themselves last and to defend women at their own expense.”
Funny, I thought it was feminism trying to deconstruct the gender norms such that people aren’t socialized to such radically different sets of character traits and trying to highlight the genderlessness of all sorts of qualities, both good and bad.
I must’ve dreamed it or something. /sarcasm
I can’t imagine how hurtful it would be to lose a loved one, and then run into one of these MRM posts that minimizes and dismisses the sacrifice that they made.
Reportedly there was a guy in the theatre who left his baby and not only fled but DROVE AWAY, while his girlfriend saved both both of her kids despite a broken leg (arm? Something broken, anyway). I wonder if these dudes would say he made the right call?
I must extend a thought in the previous post a little. “Protecting for the wrong reasons”, with that I refer exclusively to close relationships, friends and relatives. There’s a reason to protect total strangers, too, but I think it’s done with a different motive. I understand that few are willing to risk life for a stranger, and they don’t need to; lesser dedication is enough and smaller actions can still help. But I don’t think we can love someone and defend them while setting conditions for our protection. Such as a condition to devote a life to worship us if we die for them. Unless someone demanded you to give your life for them, you cannot make demands of them if you do choose to give your life for them.
You know what? Maybe there was some gendered socialization at play here, maybe something in these men’s actons did come from the idea that men are supposed to be heroes and protectors — but that doesn’t make it okay for these jerks to be calling them “suckers.” They were still humans, protecting their loved ones, and their actions were still admirable. It’s not cool to shit on their sacrifice.
No one should feel like they have to put their lives on the line for other people, but when someone chooses to do so, that needs to be respected. And yes, women can and do risk themselves to protect loved ones too.
And yeah, +1 to all the comments pointing out how unfair it is to expect the women whose boyfriends died for them to never move on and have other romantic relationships. I doubt the men who died for them would want them to give up living afterward. Yes, these women will probably date and possibly marry in the future. That is normal, and healthy. Right now, they are likely in a lot of pain. I certainly hope that, despite their grief, they will go on to live happy lives.
Does anyone need a kitten video?
I cant recall if it was this thread or somewhere else, but some MRAs don’t have much problem with sacrificing their lives for women ONLY if women renounce equality, feminism and admit their inferiority to men. Yep, women are only worth saving if we go back to being simpering domestic slaves. I think I’ll take my chances with my modern life thanks. When its time to go its time to go.
That being said, I was talking about this with my mom and she aluded that these heroic men’s actions should be the norm. I disagreed. Self sacrifice is nobel and should be treated as such, but it should not be a requirement just for men, especially in modern times. You can certainly argue against this idea that men must sacrifice and agree that cultural influences on masculinity do have these elements. The irony is that The Dark Knight Rises plays heavily on these themes (i don’t want to spoil it for those who have not seen it but it is nothing short of perfection) the downside is that boys and men watch these movies/read comics and might feel like they have to sacrife their lives for respect and love. The upside is that characters like Batman are worshipped and leaves girls and women thinking that their role is not hero, but passive loser that needs saving and who is not capable of saving anyone. I know as a fan of superhero movies and some comic series I feel this way sometimes.
So yeah, this certainly is a topic worth discussing, but since MRAs just want to play gender war I ask them this: what was the sex of the person that did the shooting in the first place?
Please, more kitten videos. Don’t forget puppehs
Cloudiah:
Have you ever seen a cat acting like it is all that and too cool to play? I’m wondering if is because they’re trying to live down the embarrassment of diving head-first into a camera as a kitten and other such cute, but ridiculous behavior.
I think that’s my new theory for feline “puh-LEEZ!” behavior.
These 3 men did what they thought to be the right thing. They should be applauded. They and their girlfriends and families deserve respect.
And before anyone mentions, yes I know there are female superheros, no most of them don’t feel believable when they prance around oozing sex appeal rather than intimidation.
Yes, puppies too (the music on this one is annoying, but the roly poly puppies make up for it):
Here’s an article on slate XX factor, what women really think, by the feminist darling, Hanna Rosin.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/07/23/aurora_dark_knight_shooting_the_men_protected_the_women.html
A few choice exerpts.
“On the Today show interview, Jansen Young, the girlfriend Blunk saved, mentioned that Jonathan was thinking about re-enlisting in the Navy. She attributed that to his undying heroism, but it may also have to do with the fact that he, like a few guys in the theater, was working at Target and surely not making enough money to support one family, much less two. Young, meanwhile, had just finished getting her veterinarian degree, becoming the latest in an onslaught of women who have taken over that lucrative profession, which was not very long ago dominated by men.”
“I’ve found a strained and touching effort to redefine the roles of men. They are often not the breadwinners because in that slice of America, women are often financially better off than the men. They are often not the steady fathers because couples don’t get married all that much anymore, and the women, if they are working themselves, see the men as just another mouth to feed. But one thing I find consistently is the enduring need for men to think of themselves and women to think of them as the protectors.”
Do go read the whole thing. Ahhh, feminism. Just look at the fine creatures modern women have become.
Steele, I’m not going to say that the social conditioning of men giving up their lives isn’t around, but I will say that its not nearly as strong as MRAs would have us believe.
And to see the very group who should have been lauding the three mens sacrifice the most calling them suckers….. Disgusting, just disgusting.
What’s even worse is that the OP wasn’t a bad one. It was the commentors who totally took it off track to piss and moan about themselves, rather than commemorate the bravery of the men who died. The commentors themselves made these guys “expendable” for their cause, pissing on women they don’t even know.
Oh and while you’re reading the article, do have a run thru the comments. Modern women are simply priceless.
You want to know what I think about this story, and these “heroes”
How much do you really know about what they were doing, and whom they were protecting?
We only have their girlfriend’s words on why and how these men died.
We can’t go in and examine a dead man’s head to really see what was behind their actions.
If there’s any “gendering” going on, it’s the idea that men “should” go and die for their girlfriends.
Honestly, die for whatever you want. There’s an infinite amount of things to die for, and we as species are just getting started on it.
MRAs talking about the alleged feminist view of men: “Contrary to what feminists say, men have done all sorts of noble, sacrificial things throughout history.”
MRAs talking about men doing noble, sacrificial things: “suckers don’t even get pussy”
Naturally I expect to see a vigorous and protracted debate in the MRM about this discrepancy.*
*lol not really
Oh my gosh, puppy buddies, that football is almost as big as you are!
It’s a no-win setup. If men defend women, this proves how noble men are. If men don’t defend women, this proves how women don’t deserve it.
(If women defend others, LA LA LA CAN’T HEAR YOU.)
That’s exactly right. Those men are heroes, and their loved ones deserve respect and compassion. I can’t imagine they pain they must be going through.
I agree. That would be very hurtful for them to know the terrible things the MRA’s are saying about the men they lost. Sometimes the MRA’s remind me of the Westboro Baptist Church in the way they gloat about other peoples’ misfortunes.
Steele, why do I know of so many moms who have died saving their children then? What about the woman at the cell phone store that died saving customers in the Joplin tornado? Self sacrifice is something that both men and women do, so please stop trying to make into a reason to bash women.
@Naira:
Funny, I thought it was feminism trying to deconstruct the gender norms such that people aren’t socialized to such radically different sets of character traits and trying to highlight the genderlessness of all sorts of qualities, both good and bad.
SO MUCH THIS. It astonishes me how much time MRAs spend vilifying feminism for problems created by good old-fashioned heteronormative, patriarchal gender roles, the very thing feminists are trying to fight. I don’t post much, but have been lurking around Manboobz for a long time, and it comes up again and again.
@Bea:
As someone already said, we can’t know what was going on the minds of those men. I just want to make it clear that I am not saying they were or were not socialized to believe that men should give up their lives for women and not the reverse.
But, even if they were, that’s something feminists are working to deconstruct.
To that point, that’s exactly why I don’t give the MRA any credit for their stated goals. The goals and whining about oppression are just the excuse to hate women and justify a persecution complex. If they really wanted to achieve anything, the overarching philosophy of feminism would not be so abhorrent. Maybe disagreements on the best way to get things done, but nothing like the seething they do.
——————–
Honestly, when it comes to dying for another person, I’ve more often seen it portrayed as a rare ability in anyone, not just the sole domain of one gender. A few times I’ve seen it portrayed as “natural” for a mother (in particular) to die for her children. But that isn’t generally the strongest message, more that it took courage beyond the norm to do it.
Wow. They’re approaching Westboro Baptist Church territory here. As in, regular people should have been worried all along, but now even bigots are going to start distancing themselves.
‘ Most women have been told their entire lives they can have it all’
This is it, isn’t it? They hear the marketing aimed at little girls and women and assume it’s all fai accomplish. Instead of considering, you know, that if women were really totally confident and equal and having a ball, they wouldn’t need a diet pill maker or lipstick brand to remind them.
Damn Western women. So spoiled they won’t even throw themselves on their dead boyfriends’ funeral pyre.
Women sacrifice their lives all the time for others, it’s called – having babies.
I guess MRA’s still believe in storks.
These men did an incredible thing by saving another life and I have nothing but respect for them. Shame on the MRA’s.
That us fait accompli, via Autocorrect.
What’s more is that women were told they could “have t all”, but in order to have that, we also have to do it all. There are a few articles about how middleclass families split chores and childcare, but mostly the articles are about upping the standards or child rearing, housecleaning, entertaining, providing extracuricular activities, all while also keeping up with high power careers that require twelve hour days and an on call status. And who is called on to take care of this? Women, men are rarely if ever mentioned.
I don’t think it is fair to vilify the man who ran away, it is not an easy situation and very difficult for people who will often behave on instinct. The men who gave their lives for their girlfriends were brave, generous and caring people and it is horrible anyone had to die. I don’t think it should be the norm, and I have dated people who’d have saved me, and people who’d have run away leaving me to die. However, what is so bad about the fact that one of the women who survived due to this was more educated than the man who gave his life for her? It is tragic he died, and it was a horrible decision to have to make, but why does the fact his girlfriend was more educated than him make his decision different from if she wasn’t?
And if James Holmes hadn’t been there with three guns and thousands of bullets, none of those people would be shot today. But how terrible of me to point out the central facet of this chivalric code entails men protecting their women from other violent men.
Sorry, that last post was in response to major udder fondlers favorite “entitled princess” rant.
Yes Slavey, if I’m fucking working my ass off for it I am entitled to have it all.
Steele, why do I know of so many moms who have died saving their children then?
This is obviously the one cultural exception; mothers are expected to protect their children.
Self sacrifice is something that both men and women do, so please stop trying to make into a reason to bash women.
I’m merely stating a fact. It’s not a coincidence that three men died protecting women, and you know it. It’s not “bashing women” to acknowledge the fact that men are expected to be more self-sacrificial. Unless you consider questioning the aforementioned male privilege fetish/misandrist/male evil/male Original Sin apple cart to be “bashing women”.
the central facet of this chivalric code entails men protecting their women from other violent men.
No, not really- it involves men protecting women from any and all danger.
How does one question an apple cart, exactly?
Pear Tree, I’m inclined to agree with you, the guy panicked like so many others. To single him out is rather unfair.
The reason that her being more educated is being focused on is because its a stick to beat feminists with. If we “really” believed in equality, than wed be throwing our lives in danger for the men too, instead of just taking their jobs.
@Naira: As someone already said, we can’t know what was going on the minds of those men. I just want to make it clear that I am not saying they were or were not socialized to believe that men should give up their lives for women and not the reverse.
Oh, no, I totally got that, and I completely agree. We have no way of knowing exactly why they did what they did. What I meant was, even if socialization did play a part, it does not erase the bravery it took for them to put a loved one’s safety before their own. We can’t know if there was some cultural influence at play here. Even if there was, we are all influenced by culture and we all still have agency and make choices. These men chose to save their loved ones (as did a few women) and whatever their reasons were, they deserve to be remembered respectfully.
Whether or not there was a men = protectors/women = protected thing going on here, that concept is not one feminism invented or generally reinforces.
To clarify my position upon the issue, I of course find these young men to be heroes. I expect their girlfriends feel the same way. I’m merely speaking to the larger misandrist cultural framework that logically leads to this kind of thing more often than the reverse. Obviously the consequences of said misandrist framework are usually not death. But the framework hurts a large majority of men in a thousand smaller ways- this is what’s known as “systematic”.
Steele, chivalry never applied to the vast majority of women…ever. Chivalry was only ever applied to noble born women, and nobility was vanishingly small. Working class folks never took it up.
Er, to clarify my last post — I mean I don’t see feminists insisting men should protect women and women should not protect men. As far as I can tell, these MRAs have pulled that directly out of their asses.
the central facet of this chivalric code entails men protecting their women from other violent men.
And in addition to free bodyguard service, it compels men to serve and please women in a hundred other smaller ways, like a combination driver, butler and all-purpose glorified servant.
And WHOOSH, there goes the point, right over your head. If James Holmes, a man, had not been shooting everyone, no one in that theater would have been asked to make any sort of sacrifice whatsoever. But I’m sure you and NWO will find a way to show us how women are to blame for that point, as well.
From the Slate article Slavey was quoting:
None of these life details are meant to detract from the men’s heroism. They are only meant to make it more poignant, and even beautiful.
Yeah, she’s just a vile feminist who hates men all right. Reading is fundamental, Slavey.
@Bea
“SO MUCH THIS. It astonishes me how much time MRAs spend vilifying feminism for problems created by good old-fashioned heteronormative, patriarchal gender roles, the very thing feminists are trying to fight. I don’t post much, but have been lurking around Manboobz for a long time, and it comes up again and again.”
Patriarchal gender roles? Everywhere? In every diverse culture all throughout recorded history? This play has been played out in some fashion forever. It can’t be socialized everywhere in every culture no matter how secluded thru all time.
Suffice it to say men are great. Instead of trying to find ways to demean men or make into a contest, or some feminist patriarchy nonsense, why not just praise men for being selfless?
—————
@valerienorth
“Women sacrifice their lives all the time for others, it’s called – having babies.”
Again, demeaning an act of courage.
Dying from childbirth is the same as dying from a heart attack. It’s an accident. It isn’t a concious choice to self sacrifice.
Would it kill ya’s to just admit that men do die in self sacrificing situations in massive numbers? And men are just the best damned thing in the world for doing that, and you’re damned right we’re gonna praise them for it. And then just leave it at that. No patriarchy nonsense. No gender role bullshit. No competition shit of women do this or that.
Just, “Men just rock for doing that shit and we just love em to death.” The end.
I think the social conditioning for men to protect women is alive and well. I think the actions of these men were brave and deserve hero status. Three human shields are enough to show that men still are taught this imperative to protect. I’m a little confused by those saying this isn’t so, a cursory glance at the world around will show you most protecting and resultant death of said acts of protection are from men. Is there really that much hate that this can be discounted so easily?
Taking bets on how soon someone mentions the Titanic…
Also, if XXX is aimed at a female audience, that means it’s a feminist site and representative of feminist values, in Slavey’s own private universe.
@Bea:
Muchly agreed. I was also just taking the time to throw in a bit of a disclaimer in case someone took my first post differently than I’d intended. Your reply made me re-read it and realize there are a few things that could be read into it that I hadn’t thought of.
Like a chauffer! Because you know driving the little wifey ( who couldn’t drive without permission from hubby) is so exhausting to do once a week so she can spend hours getting the groceries, picking up drycleaning, buying the family clothes, taking the kids for haircuts, doctors appointments etc on a budget.
Dude, most men back in the day didn’t want their wives spending money on cabs if they had a perfectly good car in the driveway.
And what guy butlers for his own household?
XX Factor, I mean, or whatever Slate calls their ladyblog. I don’t know anyone who actually reads it, since “left-leaning urban feminist” isn’t really their target demographic.
Hey! Steele would be a great writer if it wasn’t for those evil feminists that stopped him from going into the humanities. Criticizing his communication skills is probably just another form of misandry.
All purpose servants in what way Steele?
Last weekend Beloved put some shelves up for me. I’ve cooked numerous meals for him. Should we be keeping score of this?
Free bodyguard service my ass. Most men haven’t thrown a punch since they were in highschool at the latest. Most instances where a bodyguard would be needed, men are just as helpless as the women they are standing next to.
Speaking of women who’ve given their lives for others, there’s Miki Endo, the hero of Minami-Sanriku:
http://www.good.is/post/heroes-hear-the-voice-of-the-young-heroic-woman-who-saved-thousands-of-lives/
And not to whiplash the mood, but:
“And in addition to free bodyguard service, it compels men to serve and please women in a hundred other smaller ways, like a combination driver, butler and all-purpose glorified servant.”
BAHAHAHA, seriously?
NWO, I hope you never accuse David of “cherrypicking” quotes, given that you just very obviously went out of your way to exclude this bit of that article, seeing as it’s the only thing in between the two parts you quoted:
Personally, I think that article is pretty pointless (And I had no idea Hanna Rosin was supposed to be my “darling” – I don’t even know who she is beyond “some journalist.” If that’s enough to earn someone “darling” status, I guess everyone here has a lot of “darlings.”) – but, see, I can say that article seems kind of dumb without deliberately trying to distort what it actually says.
It doesn’t really matter what you have been conditioned to think, because there isn’t a whole lot of thinking going on. What matters is what you are conditioned, or inclined, to do.
Some people step up and some people step back and yet others stand there trying to figure out what is going on.
It happens too fast to decide what you are going to do. You just do.
Oh bawwwwww! /\ Women are raped and murdered by their male partners everyday! How exactly is this culture “misandrist” when women are more likely to get murdered and raped by men than men themselves? I don’t deny that males are raped but that often when they are young and guess what? They are raped by much stranger men. so, nice try with the misandry shit! See? Even Google Chrome doesn’t recognize “misandry” as a word!
I actually agree that there is some gendered socialization that encourages men to protect women and even sacrifice their lives for the women they love if need be. This is NOT the only reason a man would protect a woman (I still think the biggest reason, far more powerful than socialization, is out of love) and it doesn’t mean that women can’t be heroic. But it is there. And with the exception of mothers dying to protect their male children, women dying to protect men is comparatively rarer compared to men dying to protect women or people of either gender dying to protect a same-gender friend. Which is not to say it doesn’t or can’t or will never happen, just that it’s generally rarer.
The thing is, that’s not because men are expected to be “servants.” In fact, on a day-to-day basis, it’s WOMEN and not men who are expected to take a servile position towards their male significant others. Women are expected to cook, clean, agree with everything their male partner says and prop up his ego constantly, have sex on demand whenever he wants it however he wants it, and do all of this without complaint. Indeed, this is how women are expected to “earn” men’s protection. I know far more men who expect their girlfriend to be a combination mommy/maid than I do women who expect a butler. The traditionalist deal (where these socializations come from) is that women spend all their time catering to their boyfriend or husband, and he in turn provides for her financially and protects her physically, even to the point of giving up his life for hers if need be.
The problem with MRA’s is they want one half of this deal, where the woman perpetually caters to the man without complaint, without the other half of the deal, which demands they be women’s protectors in exchange for that. In my experience, women who think it’s men’s job to protect and financially support them also tend to believe that it’s THEIR job to be a domestic servant and let their man have his way on day-to-day matters. Feminists and other women who don’t think they should be domestic servants also do not tend to think that it’s not men’s job to protect them or support them. Occasionally you run into someone who calls herself a “feminist” but still wants a man to be chivalrous and take care of her financial needs; such women are rare though, which is why they’re notable.
In any case, what happened at that Aurora theatre was a tragedy, and everyone who gave or risked their lives for someone else,male or female,is a hero.
*snort*
All of this is hilarious, but I particularly love “all-purpose glorified servant,” since that would appear to mean “person who sometimes does assorted household chores, but is not a servant.” Or in other words, “ordinary member of household, excluding only babies and adults who act like babies.”
Being expected to do the dishes sometimes is MISANDRY, you guys!
(Also, the “butler” silliness means you now have me picturing my partner and I as Jeeves and Wooster, which is a pretty damn funny image, so thanks for that.)
Taking out the trash is misandry, if a man does it, or a woman asks him to do it. Driving your partner somewhere is also misandry. Driving the kids to soccer practise? Wait, Steele probably thinks the little tykes drive themselves.
‘I’m merely stating a fact. It’s not a coincidence that three men died protecting women, and you know it [unless you also rea about the women who protected men or the men who didn't protect women. Then it just might be!]‘
No, no, it’s not a coincidence that these are the three cases misogynists are focusing on. The same bunch that had a problem with that woman who was ‘saved’ from getting hit by a ca by Ryan Gos,ing, then had the gall to suggest it wasn’t that big of a deal and people should focus on other issues.
My god. your kind can barely get over holding doors open for people (still it comes up, all the time!).
how come when you post your observations, it’s ‘merely a fact’ but when anyone else does it it’s always either ‘delusion’ ‘ideology’ or ‘VILE HATE SCUMBAGS’
do you not get the relationship between that sort of shit and your very obvious sense of entitlement?
Yes, probably. As would any man whose wife or girlfriend died. It would be unreasonable to expect otherwise. Just because your significant other dies, it doesn’t mean that you have to stop living, too.