Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This topic sure can get people riled up, particularly on Relationships, so I'll put it here and ask for its underpinnings.
First, I want to clarify that I do not believe this concept is correlated to ingratiating behavior to obtain sex. It is merely a man's heightened, or even exaggerated, level of sensitivity to a woman's concerns. It can become apparent in a school or work environment.
In a work environment, the norm would be for a supervisor or manager to champion whomever is better qualified and does better work, regardless of gender. So, what is the story when you have a highly educated married man who is also religious, champions women at a highly disproportionate rate, is NOT obtaining sexual favors from them, they are usually younger and not capable/experienced enough, and concurrently seems to spar with the men in the organization more to the detriment of getting the work done? (FYI: this guy grew up playing baseball and whatnot, though probably not stellar at it, but there's nothing effeminate about him). I have seen it more than once, but this person is the poster child.
Can someone attempt to explain this concept when the tactics do NOT involve sexual ingratiation?
How many men rescue women if they aren't going to get sex?
I know of one -- every time his damsel in distress moves out of a bad relationship with some guy or husband, she moves in with him. She cries on his shoulder, he listens, takes her side. He adores her except if he's drinking and she's drinking too much -- then he'll even tell her she's a c***. No one knows for sure but we all think they are only platonic except it's obvious he'd like it to be more, we think that he figures that eventually she's going to be his fair lady and he's just putting up with the fact that she keeps looking for someone else.
Because he wants to live in a world where men and women interact for mutually beneficial reasons and not some sinister or perverted self-fulfilling agenda? Where they help one another and where perceived injustice to one is regarded as injustice to all?
Because he wants to live in a world where men and women interact for mutually beneficial reasons and not some sinister or perverted self-fulfilling agenda? Where they help one another and where perceived injustice to one is regarded as injustice to all?
Reread.
He fought with the men in the organization. You don't mess with seasoned guys, 40ish, some with families, to advance 27 year old girls who haven't cut their teeth and are NOT ready to lead assignments.
It was so unproductive that it caused some to leave and let assignments unstaffed and dangling, putting the organization in a bad position with clients and consultants.
What I do know about him, from those who grew up around him, was that his mother was an icy b-itch and so was his wife, disliked by most, who got him to convert from Protestant to Catholic. There are bigger fish to fry. He could have remained Protestant, or gotten her to convert. That's a preview into the women in his life. His daughters were young. So were his sons.
in the vast majority of cases , white knights are complete phoneys
They did personality profiles on all of us, a new-gen type study, and his results were dismal.
His mother was an icy cold b-itch, from people who knew him as a young adult, and so was his wife, who nobody liked. His wife caused him to convert to Catholicism from being a Protestant. Big deal. He could have remained a Protestant, or gotten her to convert. Both of them are the farthest thing from any Catholic ideal I know of. I think they view their procreation, with his often enumerating how many kids he has, as credible evidence of his moral and ethical worthiness.
I object to the term "Male Feminist" being used to label the men you describe in the OP. That sounds more like a Female Supremacist who happens to be male. The best definition of feminism I've found is the oft quoted "Feminism is the radical notion that woman are human beings." Your scenario, however, speaks to more of a Supremacy mindset and might be attributed to a disdain toward males. The question then would be: where does that disdain originate? And the answers could be endless if we're asking on a general level or very specific and personal if we're examining just one individual.
I object to the term "Male Feminist" being used to label the men you describe in the OP. That sounds more like a Female Supremacist who happens to be male. The best definition of feminism I've found is the oft quoted "Feminism is the radical notion that woman are human beings." Your scenario, however, speaks to more of a Supremacy mindset and might be attributed to a disdain toward males. The question then would be: where does that disdain originate? And the answers could be endless if we're asking on a general level or very specific and personal if we're examining just one individual.
Your point is taken. I have never heard that term before, but male feminist and white knight are used often enough.
This person was toxic, and I am sure still is. The worst part is how he paraded around his Catholicism and bragged about the number of kids he has, almost as if it was a measure of his virility ... or "something" like that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
