Happy Valentine’s Day, gynocrats!.
Over on A Voice for Male Students, the always-reasonable and never-hysterical Jonathan Taylor celebrates this day of candies and flowers and irritating Kay Jewelry commercials with a lovely little piece entitled “The gynocentrism of Valentine’s Day, and the spoiled princess mentality.”
In it, he takes aim at a holiday he sees as rewarding the sort of woman who behaves like a “privileged princess who didn’t get her pony when she was five.”
His proof of this “gynocentrism?” The custom graphics on Google’s home page today, which I have screencapped and pasted in above.
At first glance, this all seems very innocent. We all remember these adorably crappy candies with the little messages on them. But Taylor is able to discern its insidious deeper meaning in their words:
The inclusion of the “Mr. Right” heart may seem like a small thing, but it is also rather telling, especially coming from the #1 website in the world. Women have expectations and standards. Where are men’s expectations and standards?
We aren’t told about them. Unlike “Mr. Right,” the phrase “Ms. Right” isn’t used in common parlance. The very incidence of men having standards for women is often regarded as sexist, even if they are entirely reasonable – such as not being so fat that you are diabetic by the time you are 35 and bedridden by the time you are 55.
In the age of Feminism, the only people women “answer to” are themselves.
Now that I’ve taken a closer look at Google’s message, I think that Mr. Taylor is if anything understating its creepy gynocentric intent. Take a look again at the first two candies.
CRUSH MR. RIGHT
Clearly this is an invitation to murder. Nay, to MAN GENOCIDE.
FIRST KISS 4EVER YOURS
… because if he is dead, your first kiss will make him — or at least his corpse — forever yours.
PUPPY LOVE
Of course if he is dead, he will not be able to fulfill his normal sexual functions. So Google seems to be recommending bestiality.
BLIND DATE
And then, to cover up your crimes, it suggests that you blind all of your future dates so they can’t see the corpse you’ve got stashed in the spare bedroom. (You may also need to do something about their sense of smell.)
Has the true ugliness of this gynocentric holiday ever been more nakedly displayed?
—
Just in case anyone missed it, this post is almost entirely made up of
… except for the bit about Kay Jewelry ads, which really are irritating.
Oh that big meanie, making poor penguin run! 😀
Felinist Counter Theory – the Hivemind
“So, do many more men do this, compared to men who do not? Who the hell cares about expectations, it’s actual behaviour that’s important.”
That would be the ideal attitude, but you know that isn’t always how it goes down. Fighting gender-based social expectations is after all one goal of feminism, and for good reason (and it should be for MRAs, too, if they were truly about those rights and weren’t simply using these issues as mere talking points against feminism). So, yeah, scew Valentine Day’s customes, they *are* sexist. But they aren’t a sign of some nebulous wider ranging female social superiority in modern times, as the article alleges, but rather actually part of what some may call “the Patriarchy”.
Oh, and also good point, Marie, about heteronormativity. The claim that the “Mr Right” is discriminatory against men rests on the unfounded assumption it’s meant for women 😉
Uh… what about all media ever? Are you seriously saying that there’s no pressure on women to look a certain way, or that there’s no cultural standards of beauty?
Also, who is forcing men to date women that they don’t find attractive, or women that act in ways that they can’t stand? Man-o-spherians always complain about women’s romantic behavior as if a) all women were all exactly alike and b) men were forced to date them at gunpoint. Like, maybe when you are first getting to know a ladyperson, you could ask “hey, do you think men should always pay for dates?” and if the answer indicates that she buys into gender norms that you object to, you could be like “well maybe this isn’t going to work out.”
I really don’t understand the angst about this stuff. I don’t particularly like the ‘type’ of woman that expects men to pay for all dates, or expects dozens of roses on Valentines day. So… I don’t date people like that. I also don’t date people I don’t find attractive. I know this is a radical solution, but you might give it a try.
@kittehs
::cackles evilly::
“Oh that big meanie, making poor penguin run”
And no bon bons! How is that penguin supposed to be a proper feminist whore?
@Octo: yes, and the real point is around the behaviour. Otherwise the argument would be that it didn’t matter if the man didn’t “take the woman out to dinner, pay for this or that, and perhaps buy her jewelry or some kind of gift” so long as he *intended* to do that, or thought that was the correct behaviour to exhibit.
I know that behaviours follow attitudes (and attitudes follow behaviours), but even though it was expressed as an expectation, it was more around the behaviour. Which is why I asked for evidence relating to the behaviour, and not the attitudes.
That Google doodle is interactive: click on each heart, and you get a different recording of a true love story collected by Ira Glass. The story for “Mr. Right” is from an older woman:
The morning after I got married, I woke up with this huge doubt and a heavy heart. Questioning. It was so embarrassing, like, tch, you’re so stupid, you should have thought about that before, right? But the heartache was real. All of a sudden, the enormity of it almost crushed me. So I just wanted to walk around and clear my head, thinking, “What should I do, what should I do? Do I have to tell him?” I might have made a mistake, but that would hurt his feelings. All day long, I walked and walked.
Finally, when it got dark, I came home and he–my husband–he was just so worried. His face, I could tell. He said, “Where have you been? I called the police because I thought you got lost or something happened. Then I thought…well…he’s a good man and I should give it a try. That was 42 years ago, and since then I have never questioned. Never.
MISANDRYYYYYYY
God, the nerve of society, expecting male purchasing units to perform demonstrative activities once a year for the female concavity they are currently affiliated with!
Well, here’s a thought: if the thought of doing something nice for another person is a chore and a burden, maybe you shouldn’t be coupled with that person. Or at all.
@Kiwi, well speaking from personal experience: When I was younger and new to the whole dating thing (which was still emberassingly late), I did do the whole “take over all the costs” thing, even with women who surely would not have minded split costs. Simply because, well, I thought it was somehow expected of me. I’ve since wisened up, though. And I’ve never bought jewelry for Valentine’s Day 😉
I agree that of course behaviour is what counts most, especially if we want to find out how prevalent a problem is. I just think we shouldn’t flippantly dismiss social expectations and restrictions, either.
You know, there’s nothing wrong with wanting to only date people who are physically fit and make lifelong physical fitness a priority.
There is, however, a lot wrong in being a hostile misogynist snot-wipe in the way you express that preference.
Oh, and today’s my tenth wedding anniversary. We’re going to make chocolate-covered strawberries and cook a romantic dinner at home.
Aw, Jonathan must have a Google alert on his name! Happy Valentine’s Day, twerp.
(And genuinely, HVD to all the rest of you.)
There are no Ms. Rights because all women are factory robots you can order from the vagina store and program to fulfil your specific desires and fantasies. All these manopshere internet spaces are really just bug reporting, as for the last 4 decades or so most Western female factory models have been faulty. A ‘Ms. Right’ implies humanity and individuality that we all know women don’t have. Feminism is just a computer virus.
On a more serious note, I can’t be the only one here who has used it as an excuse to eat chocolate for breakfast and watch sappy movies during the day. I also can’t be the only woman on the planet who buys her man chocolate. I also enjoyed making the cards and exchanging them with classmates in elementary school because they were cheesy fun. I’ve really got nothing against Valentine’s Day, but then, I’ve never had childish hangups about giving.
If anything, the extreme lopsided frequency of “Mr. Right” versus “Ms Right” in the culture at large, as reflected in the Google header, is androcentric rather than gynocetric. It is not men to whom patriarchal culture ascribes the quality of being incomplete without women. We never hear “old cat men,” because men alone aren’t thought of as needing ersatz children if they can’t make their own. We don’t read hand-wringing narratives about men who should have settled down and had kids instead of pursuing their careers, with accompanying implications (indirect or outright) that men have been “robbed” by the notion that they deserve equality. Society doesn’t talk about Ms. Right because the compulsory heterosexual patriarchal standard is nearly omnipresent, and because it gives men power over women if the premise of heterosexual relationships is that the woman must find The One Right Man to complete her life while the woman is ultimately replaceable. Jonathan’s thesis is just another example of an MRA getting indignant that women’s preferences are even brought up: by golly, he should get to enjoy his patriarchal privileges on his own terms, not some mere woman’s!
Happy anniversary, Shaenon!
Chocolate covered strawberries are the BEST.
zippydoo – “I’ve really got nothing against Valentine’s Day, but then, I’ve never had childish hangups about giving.”
Bingo. So many scrotospherians’ (or should that be scrotosphericals’?) whines come down to the horror of doing something for anyone, especially if it means spending some of their precious money. They object to buying dinner, or a present (they probably think birthdays are some sort of gynocratic plot) and the thought of supporting a child they engendered is just too, too horrible. Even the thought of trying to make sex a mutually enjoyable experience is too much for them.
As a general notion of MRAs and assorted idiots? Yes, probably. But in this specific case the problem is rather that one side is supposed to give, and the other, well, not. At least, traditionally. Now, how much this is actually a *problem* indeed depends on how much those expectations are actually followed by people, as Kiwi has noted. But if it is a problem, it is not just about giving…
I bought Mr Kiwi 5 very nice shirts because the big old department store where I live was having its annual sale – and they do *huge* discounts in that sale. He’s had a compliment each time he’s worn one. I told him he could think of it as his valentine’s present, because it was the week ahead. Last year, I think it was, I commissioned him a picture by LBT. 🙂
And he got me… nothing. Again. And we’ve been together for…. 13 years now. But he buys me things during the year, and tends to pay for coffee when we go out on the weekend, and undoes my knitting and crochet errors for me (I cry if I have to unwind more than 1 ball, he just sits there quietly and does it for me). I would much rather have this type of mutually supportive relationship than one where only valentines, a birthday, and christmas are “special” days.
It is rather telling if a person whines about the fact they have to be unselfish between 1 and 3 days a year….
Happy anniversary, Shaenon!
Octo: you clearly live in a completely different society to me as where I live, there is reciprocity expected if the two parties believe in the valentines day hype. Even if *he* is taking her out to a formal dinner, *she* is expected to dress to the nines for that (and all the preparation that entails). Or did you not consider that to be reciprocal – if you don’t consider that reciprocal then I take it you’d be okay with her wearing a gardening top matched to yoga pants and crocs.
Kiwi girl – it’s much like that for Mr K and me. He can’t do physical stuff for me on this plane, obvs, and $$$$$$$$ isn’t a thing over There (however would MRAs cope with that?) but we’re always doing things for each other. I knitted him a jumper here, ‘cos I wanted something earthly-physical of his to have. He chose the colour and pattern. Across the other side we make things for each other, from meals to knitwear to furniture. (Okay, he does the furniture, I’m no carpenter.)
But then it all comes down to liking and loving the other person and enjoying their company and wanting to do stuff together, doesn’t it – and that’s where MRAs and misogynists in general are full of fail.
::snerk:: I’m seeing an episode of The Good Life here.
not to mention, the woman is supposed to “reciprocate” by having sex, so in the strict “guy buys” model, it’s not like we’re just getting shit for free — people to adhere to that generally think women are suppossed to “give” guys sex. So this
is wrong
@Zippydoo
I so use it as an excuse to eat lots of chocolate, if that’s close enough 🙂
How about we just agree gifts aren’t necessary on V-Day, and gifts should be given out of the spirit of giving, not the spirit of wanting something in return?
@Kiwi: I, uh, would rather obviously count that as being reciprocal for me dressing up as well. Okay, to a degree, such a process is usually more arduous for women, I admit. But then I find most ‘formal’ dresses unnecessary anyway… though yeah, maybe yoga pants and crocs go a bit far, heh.
Anyway, doesn’t this attitude strike you as a bit sexist yourself? It seems like a dressed down variant of “the woman pays with sex”. Kinda. At least attitude-wise. I hope you know what I mean. If people go out, both will (hopefully) pay some attention to how they look. That the man pays and “in return” he gets to look at a beautifully dressed up partner… hm. Yeah, that kinda does seem to rest on some old gender stereotypes. Doesn’t sit comfortable with me.
A relaxed attitude of “sometimes he pays, sometimes she”, such as you yourself describe, is much better. And maybe more common then either I or Jonathan might believe, hah, I admit. Bad enough that I have to name myself in the same list as him. I do maintain that traditional Valentine’s Day customs are unfortunate and that social expectations can be bad all by themselves. But I do admit I might be making a mountain out of a molehill here.
@Fade …yeah exactly what I meant. If you think of consensual sex in a relationship which hopefully both sides want as one side giving to the other, because of old stereotypes about which gender is to be the sexually “aggressive” one… yeah, that’s sexism.
@Lids: Sounds good.