MRAs, by and large, aren’t big fans of chivalry, and complain bitterly about the terrible injustices forced upon them by this archaic concept, like having to hold doors open for ladies from time to time.
But perhaps they are not considering the many fine benefits of chivalry. In the comments section of Alcuin’s pro-patriarchy blog, our traditionalist friend fschmidt recently set forth the case for chivalry in a way that even the dullest misogynist could appreciate:
In early western culture around the time of the Renaissance, chivalry meant that ladies should be honored and sluts should be raped. This is a totally sound concept and encourages good behavior on the part of women. You cannot expect women to behave if they are not rewarded for good behavior and punished for bad behavior.
Fschmidt’s opinion inspired a lively discussion. Caeser’s Ghost argued that fschmidt had gone a bit too far with the whole rape thing:
Women who dress and behave like whores shouldn’t be raped. They should be prostitutes and treated as such.
Fschmidt replied:
Caesar’s Ghost, I have the greatest respect for prostitutes. Prostitutes provide a valuable service. But sluts provide no value and undermine morality. This is why sluts, identified as provocatively dressed women outside of areas of prostitution, were regularly raped around the time of the Renaissance.
CG argued that prostitutes deserve only the most limited sort of respect:
I respect prostitutes in so far as they fulfill a lowly but necessary function in society. Outside of that function, I have no respect or value for them.
Promiscuous women who are not prostitutes should be treated badly, but I don’t believe that they should be raped. I regard the Renaissance as a great era, but I would have to disagree with their way of handling the problem of sluts.
The mission of Alcuin’s site is, as he states at the top of every page, is to “Promot[e] the Intellectual Renaissance of the Western Tradition.” Apparently you can’t have a real renaissance without sorting out whether or not sexually active women should be raped, or just treated like shit.
For those interested in exploring fschmidt’s opinions further, check out his not-terribly-popular CoAlpha Brotherhood discussion forums. Or this post, in which I examine his CoAlpha brother Drealm’s theory about how women oppress men by dressing like sluts and not covering up their evil sexy hair.
This post merits the famous blinking
tag.
Actually, now that I think about it, yes, Price, sluts are EXACTLY like that. Don’t date sluts!
Also, virgins and inexperienced women are bad in bed, so you shouldn’t date them either!
In fact, Price, you should date NO WOMEN.
This is also why I’m in support of the Heartiste formerly known as Roissy’s goal to only fuck women who like anal sex and don’t swear.
“Who knew being a hairy-legged feminist was so hard? “
I look like a faun if I don’t shave. And I’m talking the Greek mythology kind of faun.
@Ozy: There should be a philosoraptor meme on this topic.
“If virgins are bad in bed and sluts are too easy, who do I sleep with?”
FTFY.
I will point out that our friends with the, “chivalry” aren’t talking “the middle ages”, but The Renaissance.
They aren’t right, of course, about that. The “middle ages” saw a lot of, “force = authority”, but even that was constrained. Take liberties one wasn’t actually allowed to and the offended parties could petition the local magnate to intervene. He often did.
By the renaissance… heh. Good luck with that, ‘rape anyone who isn’t acting the way I think she should”. Force of arms wasn’t limited to just the wealthy anymore, and the right of vendetta wasn’t seen as something limited to the state. A woman who had friends/family could (and would) tell them she’d been violated.
England, in particular (the country/culture these yahoos look to when they think of, “the glorious past”) wasn’t a place where rape/casual pillage was condoned. The germanic/anglo-saxon ideas of feud (reinforced in the North by the traditions of the Danelaw) that private actions entitled one to private justice, combined with the lack of any central police force until the 19th century meant that one could get away with a lot, if one could get away.
If the hue and cry was raised, however, the resultant mob would run you down and turn you over to the local justice which could be swift, and a bit myopic (for an example of how this worked practice see the illustrative scene in Oliver Twist, where Bates and the Artful Dodger pick a pocket and Oliver is chased down as the offender).
So, in renaissance Europe (esp. in England) raping someone was more likely than not going to have her family looking you up, to you put you in the ground. Somehow I don’t think they’d pondered that. They seem to think everyone will decide (a la Meller) that the bitch had it coming to her.
This, at least historically, has not been the case.
A PSA on html for wordpress.
To get italics type >i&t;text >/i<
For bold type >b<text>/b<
To get blockquotes type >blockquote< text >/blockquote<
Blockquote seems to have some other rules. The thing I’ve done which seems to work is typing the blockquote, and then putting a line break before the next piece of text.
Otherwise it will sometimes refuse to accept the close tag.
It’s a common misconception that sluts are less discriminating. A true seducer knows they’re as discriminating as any good girl– more, for a good girl is capable of pretending to be attracted to a mewling betaboy with good credentials and a good job, while a slut is driven only by her tingle. She might let you plunder her treasure an hour after meeting her, but do you think she’d let your average pedestalizing white-knight have anything but sagging balls blue as the language she spews out of her mouth? Of course not.
A corrected PSA on html for wordpress (because I flipped the signs)
To get italics type <i>text &;lt;/i>
For bold type <b>text</b>
To get blockquotes type <blockquote> text </blockquote>
Blockquote seems to have some other rules. The thing I’ve done which seems to work is typing the blockquote, and then putting a line break before the next piece of text.
Otherwise it will sometimes refuse to accept the close tag.
Holy shit, I’m still mostly in lurker mode at the moment for personal reasons, but I instantly recognized the username fschmidt, and for any people here who are not familiar with FSTDT:
one of his comments was voted the (currently) 3. worst quote in the Top 100 most horrific fundie quotes ever posted on that site.
See that charming little tidbit for yourself:
Or this one, where he speaks against this the terrible fate of honest, tax-paying rapists :
Oh, also: according to him, sluts are actually destroying civilisation! Seriously, he actually literally said that.
If you want more, click here and enter “fschmidt” in the “Fundie:” box (unfortunately I can’t seem to link to the search results).
I remember him from the love-shy.com forum days. I think David also made a few posts about them?
Also, I’m sorry for just barging in with this 😡 But I remember that he was one of the first MRA-ish guys I met online, so he left quite an impact.
Nice* to know that he has been sticking to his MO, I guess?
On a positive note: Yay, Berserk 😀
*and by “nice” I mean, creeps inducing like whoa, He really, REALLY cares about rape.
A further corrected PSA on html for wordpress (because I flipped the signs, and the visual has of html is hard to read)
To get italics type <i>text &;lt;/i>
For bold type <b>text</b>
To get blockquotes type <blockquote> text </blockquote>
Blockquote seems to have some other rules. The thing I’ve done which seems to work is typing the blockquote, and then putting a line break before the next piece of text.
Otherwise it will sometimes refuse to accept the close tag.
Son of a bitch. Lets try the italics again
For Italics type <i>text</i>
The basic rule is, < “supported tag” > text </”supported tag>.
Links are a little harder <a href =”URL”>text</a<.
I hope this one worked.
Fuck…
Links, again (this is why I don’t code)
Links are a little harder <a href =”URL”>text</a>.
You can find the html tags supported by WordPress here:
http://en.support.wordpress.com/code/
And you can see them in detail here:
http://www.w3schools.com/tags/default.asp
re the American Political Scene.
The Republicans scored their biggest victories in the latter ’70s, early ’80s, when they co-opted the editorial desks of news outlets, and managed to convince they they had to be, “more balanced”.
Significant numbers of studies have shown the populace would actually like a society slightly more left then it is now, but only when you ask them about specific things. If you ask about platforms they will suddenly shift to being (marginally) more supportive of the status quo.
If you ask them using the rhetoric of, “left/right” they will shift to being slightly right of present. Since the driving forces of the Republican party have always been extremists (from the abolitionist wing of the 1860s to the “remove the shackles from industry types of the ’80s, to the religious/racist types who joined in the ’90s and ’00s) the tendency for the rhetorical language of the Right to keep moving right, while the press is intensifying the message by refusing to call out blatant lies and nonsense has made a significant hurdle to the gov’t actually being in step with what the people truly want.
And the Right doesn’t care. They use that permanent state of dissatisfaction to keep the sense of resentment and frustration going, because it encourages feeling over reason; which allows them to rant about, “killing babies” and “destroying marriage” and “the turrists who hate our freedoms”, as if those were the cause of the resentment and anger at the dwindling middle class.
The thing is, the vast middle class Americans take for granted as, “the way the world is” is the result of some massive changes in the 30-60s. Social Security most of all. That meant money which would have been spent on keeping one’s parents alive could go to buying a house, or putting kids through school, or starting a job.
And the “Free the Markets” side of the Republican party hates that. The religious side wants to establish the New Jerusalem, and the tempting platitudes of, “The Prosperity Bible” make them a lot easier for the people who are in it for the money to co-opt them, because if they don’t get rich, it’s because they don’t deserve it.
So me, I’m a moderately socialistic sort. I think there should be a good social safety net, medical care for all (because it’s the right thing to do, and because it makes the economy stronger by making it easier for mom-and-pop businesses to start.
I think that people ought to be able to live their lives as they see fit, so long as they aren’t doing an actual harm to others (and offending my sensibilities isn’t a harm).
And I resent (no offense intended to zhinxy, or the sincere sorts working to effect changes to the system), that “libertarians” have co-opted that idea as if it were theirs, and limited to those who also think that “Freeing the Agora” (to use some dated jargon) will cure all ills, and is needed to get sane laws on drugs, greater personal liberties and the return of a more limited gov’t.
/soapbox
HTML: Finally, something I can claim to be better at than Pecunium! Huzzah!
my friend’s dad has a simple formula for rating movies: the accuracy of their depiction of guns. by his standard anaconda is the worst movie ever made because they care around some kind of impossible sawed-off shotgun. the patriot is a close second for suggesting mel gibson could pick off moving targets at a distance with revolutionary war rifles.
mra debates are like that except the critical question is how well the writer incorporates rape into his argument
@KollegeMesserschmit: The comments on the “destroying civilization” post are hilarious. At least there are normal people in the world lol.
i havent heard it come up this time around, but back in ’08 he had a line about how he was against ‘health of the mother’ exceptions to anti-abortion laws because in all his years as a doctor he’d never had to perform an abortion to save a woman’s life and therefore didnt believe it was a real thing.
doctors arent necessarily scientists. learning about science isnt the same thing as learning how to do science but a lot of doctors either dont seem to get that or dont care about the distinction.
@Joanna
Yeah, it’s one of the sites where you can usually read the comments without bashing your head repeatedly against something hard (though there can be some clueless people every now and then).
Also, fschmidt tends to show up in the comments 😀
Sharculese: I’ve used revolutionary era rifles. One can hit a moving target with them. It’s a lot trickier, but there are lots of accounts of people doing it. The book, “Wellington’s Rifles” has some very good stuff on the use of military (as opposed to private weapons) and people taking shots at game/people at ranges of about 300 yards, with iron sights.
Taking my being a better shot than most, I’ve managed to hit things about as well with cap and ball pieces as I can with modern arms.
The trick, of course, is to compute the drop, and factor the wind. Past about 300 meters, it’s dicey as all fuck, esp. with a ball, not a bullet.
But Diehard 2 lost me in the opening sequence, where they switch from blank to ball by changing mags, having just done a whole lot of firing their MP-5s on full auto.
Again, I don’t think this is true. The actual left isn’t right leaning, nor is it moving right. The centrist liberals have moved right, as the center has moved further right, but the actual left has not. If anything, we’ve been solidifying, as a number of far leftist parties report an increase rather than decrease in recruiting and organizing in the past few years.
The wonderful far leftists I have had the pleasure to associate with have kept me from becoming a total cynic, though I admit I still have days where I am at the “we don’t have to wait for a dystopia, we’re already living in one” mood.
Not to drag the conversation back to Ron Paul, but while he may be a doctor, he is a member of the wingnut version of the AMA, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. They are anti-abortion, anti-vaccine, anti-universal healthcare, pro-“health freedom”, and generally in favour of any kind of quackery you can name.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons
I wouldn’t let him come anywhere near me with a speculum.
Kristin, ain’t the (unofficial) motto of the GOP “a government small enough tp fit in a woman’s vagina”? Once again Ron Paul is the one who walks the talk!
/sarcasm
“IIRC though, we both have extensive collections of Dragon magazine and that bond should be enough to patch over that”
It is! ALWAYS!
I’m horribly sick, and I’ve been busy on a project with some other libertariany peeps unearthing stuff about the racist Ron Paul newsletters (which should tell you some things about my opinon on the matter of the Paul business, if far from all of them.)
But if you like, Some basic what’s a left-libertarian? stuff is here:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/blog/libertarian-left/
http://www.gonzotimes.com/2011/01/a-left-libertarian-manifesto/
And this video is new and there’s cartoons (cartoons!!!)
http://www.gonzotimes.com/2012/02/what-is-left-libertarianism/
And the ALL and C4SS are internetty thinky tanky organizy things.
http://all-left.net/
http://c4ss.org/
I consider myself far left, in that I’m anti-statist, anti-privelege, anti-borders, anti-corporate, anti-heiriarchy, anti-kyriarchies of all kinds, and yes – as it’s becoming increasingly popular in a very well-argued way to throw out any use of capitalism for a freed market – anti-capitalist. I don’t reject the term libertarian-socialist, But I am such in a way marked out by the american libertarian/mutualist tradition. “Socialist ends by freed market means” as Gary Chartrier would put it, and not other sorts of libertarian socialism or communism that have a stronger Marxist base and don’t usually dovetail with the individualist/market philosophies known as libertarian in the American sense. (While I have a great deal of respect for those sorts).
I have Austrian, Georgist/Geolibertarian, and Mutualist influences, and my precise notions of property and value are in flux, so I’m not a “pure” example of any kind of libertarian or left-lib, but a confused patchwork.
I DO believe strongly in safety nets, regulation, socialized/mutualized aid, worker solidarity, and etc, but don’t believe the nation-state in it’s current form is going to get us the best forms of such. Yes, I’d happily take a Euro-style welfare Social Democrat state over the mess we have now, if I must, but I’d rather eliminate systems of privelege and capital concentration than leave them largely intact and use inefficient “redistribution”.
and now I have to go lie down because I am being eaten by germs.