Search Results for 'chivalry'

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Anonymous wrote:

That 50’s chivalry s~~~ was brutal though.

That was 10 times funnier than perhaps you realize.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[KahnParticipant]

The Ludophile wrote:

Holy s~~~. @kahn, are you secretly me?!

Well, in a way you could say we are brothers.
I’ve been thinking about this, and I think part of the reason the “just go get laid” advice stinks so much is that people are literally saying that the solution to your woman problem is… another woman.
And I’m just sitting here thinking: Are. You. F~~~ing. Serious.

Also, I agree with you about our feelings as men just being absolutely disparaged. I remember watching a Girl Writes What video (on nice guys) and in it she said something that just hit me like a truck (paraphrasing): Men have powerful and uncontrollable feelings too. The way she said it was like that was perfectly normal and ok. No one has ever really said anything like that to me before, as a man, my feelings are always just treated as a problem and they need to be “dealt with” or “suppressed” or even just “replaced.”
But this simple phrase made me realize something: we as men, have a right to the full range of human emotions just like women. And even though society might tell us that’s wrong, even going so far as to criminalize it in some cases; quite frankly I say F~~~ SOCIETY. They only have women’s best interest at heart, not ours.
Indeed, I suspect that men actually experience deeper and more powerful emotions then women do for two reasons:
1. Women get over their feelings very quickly, usually 2 days to 2 weeks tops. Men don’t; usually a minimum of 6 months.
2. Women wear their emotions on their sleeves, so to speak. Men don’t, when we feel something it has meaning: not just a temper tantrum or a mood swing, it has SIGNIFICANCE.
Now, I’m not saying you should become like a woman and wear your emotions on your sleeve like NO. 2, but don’t be ashamed of your feelings: own them. They are a part of you.
And it really is sad that the worst of this disparagement comes from other men, even other MGTOW men. This only goes to show just how deeply entrenched gynocentrism is on most people’s minds; hell, just today on these forums I saw a thread where people were complaining about how chivalry is dead. Chivalry, the second most gynocentric institution right up there with the feminism that “destroyed” it. It made me sick.
That said, you have to take things with a grain of salt, a lot of these guys a pretty new to MGTOW as well.
Anyway, a video that helped me is E-tenebris by Stardusk. Sadly, I don’t think his grasp on this is much better than ours is, and what he suggests is a lot easier said than done, but to be fair; its an almost completely new idea: that men can live without needing women.
And that’s what MGTOW is; something new. It’s a path that is new and unmapped, with only a few markers left by those who have come before. We MGTOW are the adventurers sailing out onto the Atlantic Ocean, not knowing what we will find, but hopeful at finding a brave new world. Though others may tell us we will be eaten by a giant sea serpent for trying, or fall of the edge of the earth, we will continue on-wards because the thirst to find something new, something different is a part of our being as men, and because the old world simply has nothing to offer us. And although some of us might not make it, the new world calls all the same.

Best of luck to you, I don’t have answers, but I hope this helps, even if just a little.

[Anonymous]

Good job Key. YouTube just can’t seem to handle the truth. You just can’t let those little cupcakes get their feelings hurt.

That 50’s chivalry s~~~ was brutal though.

[Ned TrentParticipant]

Wow, what a video..!

Conclusion: Chivalry is not dead, oh no, it is beyond dead: it is as undead as a zombie like enslavement could ever be. In the name of true equality print that into the remainder of your hearts, brothers, since that’s the very organ which every now and then tends to pump your blood into the wrong place, “downstairs”…

I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC

[Gen.OivanParticipant]

The benefits of Chivalry?…. none, that’s it, none.

I would say a women expecting chivalry is like her opening a credit card and you are the bank; she expects a high credit limit wants to charge it to the max and flakes out when you come looking for a partial minimum payment.

[76binderParticipant]

I think chivalry in its classical sense is and should be dead. The basic concept is flawed. I am in a great relationship most find bizarre. We actually switched traditional roles for a day. Well… actually we had to assume roles to begin with. We are very non-traditional. My GF had to be chivalrous to me all day. If she didn’t open a door I refused to walk through it and so on. She thought it sucked. I thought it was great. Of course at baseline whoever gets to the door first just opens it out of courtesy normally, but for our experiment I insisted on her chivalry, and she was rightfully annoyed by it. I don’t advocate classical chivalry, but I do think courtesy is just being a good person. I hold the door for old men, and have no alterior motives.

I think women who insist on it are playing on their social advantages over men. If we turn the tables it’s considered rude. How is that equality?

[Darth SinParticipant]

There are no benefits of chivalry for you unless if you are a gay man and are trying to raise your sexual market value in the eyes of other gay men by being chivalrous towards them.

Other than that, I cannot think of any benefit chivalry gives a human male.

 

[BrainPilotParticipant]

I have given that same choice to a couple of women here and there over the years. They invariably choose chivalry on the expectation of all the free, unearned benefits they get with it. My response has been “I can do traditional chivalry if you can do traditional woman…”. They nod (as if they have some idea what the means). Then I explain that in exchange for the chivalry of being protected and provided for, traditional women took care of all the cooking and cleaning, respected and never argued with their men, and generally did whatever they were told…

yeah… you can guess what happened from there…

However, for the record, if there was a way to trade chivalry for a woman like that (and some sort of guarantee that she wouldn’t turn into the women we have now), I would probably see it as a reasonable trade: I meet her needs, she meets mine. I’m just not gullible enough to believe that any woman available to me today would hold up her end of that trade.

Look, it's not my fault that tornado dropped a house on your sister. Now get back on your broom and get your ass out of here... and take your monkeys with you

[BurgundyParticipant]

Chivalry is nothing more than, going into an investment with a loss, with the only pay-off coming with a, “maybe”.

Chivalry as just being nice, for being nice to any person, as long it doesn’t cost you anything, sure do it, the second a cost on your side is calculated, reconsider the person in question.

 

Being a Joker is far more enjoyable though.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Exsliventxs wrote:

Shes okay with it as long as I still view her as special.

OK I wasn’t going to be rude spell it out but now I am forced to.
STOP. TREATING. WOMEN. LIKE. THIS.

Guys who extend women unearned courtesy worship and adoration JUST because they are female have a f~~~ing screw loose. I don’t even blame women anymore for being all f~~~ed up about chivalry. I blame the f~~~ing men who perpetuate this s~~~. Wanna know what I tell a woman who wants to be treated special???

“Honey…. if you want to be treated special… you’re going to have to BE special.
Get busy, or shut the f~~~ up.”

That’s the gist of it.

It’s not up to YOU to just automatically think of women as “special”.
It’ up to HER to make the effort it show that she IS.

That’s what “equality” means. It means NOT special.

“I’ve always liked chivalry. However, I don’t want you to do anything for me because you think I expect it. I want you to do something for me because you want too…if that makes sense.”

Of course you do. Who the f~~~ wouldn’t like it?? I get to take off my jacket and lay it down over a puddle so that you can scamper over it to save your shoes? YAY. What’s for you not to like? I lower myself to gutter-licking lows so that you can feel superior for no goddam reason. And not only do you want me to do that s~~~ because YOU like it… you want me to lower myself because I like it.

See how f~~~ed up that is????

GREAT for her. BAD for you.

And the worst of it is, the more chivalry you extend to women…..
the LESS she will respect and be willing to f~~~ you.

STOP IT
/audio/how-to-treat-women/

STOP IT NOW
/audio/do-not-worship-women/

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[ExsliventxsParticipant]

I pulled the chivalry, told her we’re going 50/50.

Shes okay with it as long as I still view her as special. (Told her I did. Shes actually a nice lady, but just another lady.)

I honestly don’t care if shes okay with it or not because equal is equal.

Also,  been giving her the D religiously to where shes drowning the sheets, that seems to temporarily cloud her judgement. Just like all the other girls until you get into month 6 or 8.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Recently a woman accused me of being “chivalrous”.

And as a man, when I’m accused of something, I think about what that something is before running my mouth. Since a woman accused me of being it, I chose to define “chivalry” in terms that a woman could understand.

The only reason I held the door open for this woman, is because I thought she was going to walk right into it and give herself a big nasty bump on the head… and we can’t have that.

I don’t like bruised peaches either – and that’s not “chivalry”.

Women don’t seem to be able to open anything correctly without a man’s help.
A jam jar ….. a conversation ….. potato chips…… nail polish…… their legs.

So why would a DOOR be any different??

So ladies, please don’t call me chilvarous just because I don’t like a woman to hurt herself. Persistence, alcohol, and making sure your woman isn’t banging into any doors has worked since the beginning of time.

“CHIVARLY” —>> is when some poor shmuck has to put on his suit of armor and make sure his slutty girlfriend isn’t whoring herself out for more male attention on Match.com / Tinder / F~~~book / or any other dating websites.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[mgtow_85Participant]

What are the benefits of chivalry?

Absolutely f~~~ing nothing…if you’re a MAN.

Women can really benefit from chivalry. They get their meals paid for, their asses kissed, their every want and need in life generally paid for, and getting to act like a bitch in public when there are a thousand white knighting manginas close by to “defend her honor” if any man she bitches at and tries to hit decides to defend himself.

And all the while, women get to claim how strong and independent they are…while STILL demanding that men give them the normal traditional style of chivalry.

Equality and chivalry cannot exist under the same roof.

Being chivalrous if you’re a man means that you have less money in your bank account, you’re constantly on call to make a bitch happy, you always have to run around to open doors for them, even if they don’t even like it, but it’s still expected.

[Mango IngawayParticipant]

Exsliventxs wrote:

My question being, is she basically saying she wants all the benefits of chivalry and accepts the archaic notion that shes the weaker sex. (…. suure..)

Believe me, that’s just what they say to get free s~~~, as soon as there’s anything to gain from it, women like to be “weak” or “victims”.

Personally I will ALWAYS by default stick with the 50/50 approach, bitches wanted equality, they’ll get it. If they “like the traditional approach”, well I’ll like the traditional approach too, and tell them to stfu, suck my dick and make me a sandwich, since they like it old school.

It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

I recently started dating this girl that I’ve had an off/on again relationship with. In an effort to setup relationship etiquette and boundaries I asked her if she would like the chivalric approach or the feminists equality approach. I laid out all the various things I would expect her to do if we were considered equal, and all the benefits she would lose from the chivalric approach i.e. chair moving, standing when 1 seat is present, door holding etc.

She then went on to say “I’ve always liked chivalry. However, I don’t want you to do anything for me because you think I expect it. I want you to do something for me because you want too…if that makes sense.”

I then replied with, “chivalry extends from the notion that the fairer sex is the weaker sex and deserves special treatment as a result. I like it if you like it. Let me know if you change your mind.”

She texts back, “Yes, however, it makes me feel special, and I like feeling special, even though that’s where it originated.”

 

My question being, is she basically saying she wants all the benefits of chivalry and accepts the archaic notion that shes the weaker sex. (…. suure..)

Or does she just like to enjoy the special treatment, but doesn’t care that it originates out of inequality and shes just OK with it?

More importantly, does this chivalrous approach net me any extra bonuses over the feminists equality train ? And did she just hop on the gravy train and deny it’s origin?

 

Did I just **** myself? Thanks =) Also, first post on this site. New member. Dodged a bullet in 2012.

[Anonymous]

Gone Surfing wrote:

Well ladies you can either have chivalry or equality but you can’t have both.

Agree.

Let me add this,

A woman can have power or love. But she can’t have both.

Women trade power for love. When men do it, they become feminine and women are repulsed.

Carpe Diem!

[Gone SurfingParticipant]

Well ladies you can either have chivalry or equality but you can’t have both.

Another case of wanting their cake and eating it too but in this case more like wanting their cake and wanting your cake too and complaining when you tell them to f~~~ off.

The most valuable theory I’ve learned in my career majoring in political science is constructivism. The idea that the things that we often take for granted day to day are just social constructions that we’re so used to that we’ve become unaware of them. Whether it’s legitimizing the boundaries that we are born within and identifying with a specific race, nationality, or ethnicity, or mistaking the chemicals our brain releases for something tangible like “love.” I like to think that David Foster Wallace’s keynote speech “This is Water” illustrates this idea:

“There are these two young fish swimming along, and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says, “Morning, boys, how’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes, ‘”What the hell is water?'”

I feel that we do the same thing with love. For all intents and purposes, “love” has been a bane for the human race. It’s been something that we’ve sanctified for far too long. Romanticizing females as “the fairer gender” has really set gender relations back since the middle ages, and although times are changing and the breadwinner system is slowly but surely becoming archaic, the mindset still prevails…at least in contemporary society. What if the concept of love didn’t exist? What if copulation only served the purpose of continuing the human race and we minded our own business post-coitus? Yeah, we’re all animals, but we’ve moved past that. It’s the 21st century. People argue that chivalry is dead like that’s a bad thing.

[mgtow_85Participant]

RoyDal wrote:

My first week at college I was educated out of my lifelong habit of opening doors for women. In fact, she was blocking my path. Stepping aside made sense, or else I would have to shoulder her out of my way like a football lineman. She started screaming at me. I slammed the door in her face. She came boiling through the door and started screaming again — same words, she took the tirade from the top. At this point, she was out of my way, so I said something extremely rude (oddly enough this shut her up) and departed. After that, I’ve been extremely circumspect about holding doors for strange women. (It took me years longer to wise up about asking them out for dates, but I did stop approaching strangers.)

I once used to be a “hold-the-door-open-for-women” gentleman too. My mom tried to brainwash all of her 4 sons(I’m the oldest)that we should be GENTLEMEN who should always RESPECT a lady, despite her sadistic hatred for men in general, which only increased after she divorced my dad in 2001.

Until I was about 21…

I’m holding the door open for a woman…at a CHURCH social activity of all places. The previous two that had gone through the door at least smiled at me and said thank you. The third woman must have been in a real bad mood because she turned her sour-grapes facial expression at me and snapped, “I can open my OWN door, you chauvenistic PIG. I’m not helpless! Just who do you THINK you are???”

My good mood evaporated like a rain puddle in 105-degree temperatures. I snapped back, “I’m the guy who’s going to LET you open your own door from now on” and SLAMMED it in her face. Oops! The glass doors happened to be too close to her NOSE because she jolted backwards as the door slammed, her hands went to her nose, and I saw blood on her fingers right before I turned around and walked off to find the others.

I certainly never saw her at the church party and lunch. Hmmm…maybe she had to go home for some reason.

6 months ago on a Facebook singles group, a woman was complaining about chivalry being dead and how it had to come back. I posted in reply that chivalry might come back if FEMINISM died, which was for the sake of humanity as a whole.

I don’t think she appreciated my answer. Well…if I cared about being accepted by women, I’d be in a position to give a f~~~.

[BrainPilotParticipant]

I do not owe a relationship, or the benefits of a relationship with me, to any person. If I’d chosen to participate in bringing children into this world, I might feel that I owed them, but I have not.

All healthy relationships are mutually voluntary, and I will not voluntarily enter one that I cannot voluntarily leave with equal efficiency.

My voluntary participation in a relationship requires that its benefits to me match or exceed its liabilities to me.

I do not agree that cash or financial assets should ever change hands on the grounds of marriage or divorce.

I can abandon any relationship I choose, for any reason I choose, or for no reason at all, other than that I feel like it.

How I feel and what I think of me matters more to me than what anyone else feels or thinks about me. I cannot be shamed into a relationship, or into or out of any other behavior.

I reject any expectation that I put another person’s needs or desires before my own.

I do not owe chivalry, charity, admiration, approval, acceptance, validation, or any other emotional maintenances or generosity to anyone. These are gifts, not debts.

I require approval for this position from exactly no one.

Any man who can benefit from this example is free to do so with no debt to me.

Look, it's not my fault that tornado dropped a house on your sister. Now get back on your broom and get your ass out of here... and take your monkeys with you