Men and women are not equal

A few days ago I wrote a blog entry — a “letter to my son” — where I encouraged men to respect women and pursue healthy, monogamous relationships. Apparently, that’s what passes for “controversial” and “divisive” nowadays. The post took off like wildfire, garnering over two million views in just a few days and, while most people reacted positively to the piece, I was still inundated with volumes of incredibly vicious hate mail. I can’t wait to see how these people respond next week when I really push the envelop and write a post denouncing arson and puppy abuse.

You know me and my controversial opinions.

Based on the comments and emails from the outraged masses, I am a “woman worshiping feminist” and a “feminine wuss.” But I’m also a “male chauvinist” and a “paternalistic assh*le.” In totality, I guess I’m a male chauvinist feminist paternalistic woman worshiper. Oh, and I’m also an “extreme right winger” who, oddly, “buys into left wing propaganda.” Thankfully, they could at least agree that, whether I’m a fundamentalist oppressor of women, or a spineless subservient wimp, I am certainly “full of sh*t.” See, who says bi-partisanship is dead?

Either way, I’m utterly wrong and horrendously evil, all because I wrote a blog post about chivalry and respect.

Fine. So be it. This is the price of being counter-cultural, and it’s really not such a horrible price to pay. But what disturbed me more than the inevitable Attack of the Trolls, were the literally hundreds of people who told me they agreed with the message, and thought it constructive and urgently necessary, yet I “lost them,” or they “stopped reading,” or they “changed their minds about me,” because of one three word sentence halfway through my rather lengthy post. Here is that decisive phrase: “I’m no feminist.” There goes the whole heartfelt and sincere piece about loving, protecting, and being loyal to women; apparently negated in the minds of many because I didn’t give myself the proper label. This is America now. We care only about the label, the surface, the texture, because we don’t have the time, or the intellectual energy, to analyze pesky things like “context,” “content,” and “meaning.” These people who would ultimately oppose a message they really support because it isn’t attached to the label they expected, would, I imagine, also reject a sip of clean water in the desert if they didn’t like the color of the canteen in which it was contained.

In the last couple of days I’ve been told a thousand times by a thousand different folks that feminism is simply “the belief that men and women are equal.” Then these same people will kindly inform me that I am a feminist, whether I think so or not. Wow, thanks everyone. Why should I worry about defining myself when I’ve got the internet to do that for me? Of course, this definition of feminism is woefully shallow and purposefully misleading. It simply isn’t honest to pretend that feminism hasn’t inexorably linked itself with slightly less palatable sentiments, like the one that says unborn babies aren’t people, or that stay at home moms aren’t “real women.” For every person who tells me it’s possible to be a pro-life feminist, I can find ten feminists who will insist that no such thing can actually exist. Is pro-life feminism an acceptable variation, or an oxymoron? I really don’t know, nor do I care. If my understanding of feminism is vague and convoluted, it’s only because the term itself is vague and convoluted.

But, for the sake of argument, I’ll pretend that feminism’s only legacy is bringing about, or striving for, “equality” between men and women. Even in this fantasyland, I still can’t jump on the Feminist Bandwagon. Men and women are NOT equal, at least not in the practical sense of the word. Yes, men and women are “equal” in intrinsic worth; they have immortal souls and are endowed by God with a dignity and value that can not be diminished or reduced. This is the only sort of “equality” that can ever exist between people, or between genders, and it is the only sort of “equality” that really matters. Because we are all “equal” in the spiritual sense, we should all treat each other with love and respect. I don’t need feminism to tell me this, Christianity has been teaching it for two thousand years. I can’t stand these modernist movements that come along, borrow a little slice of Christian philosophy, uproot it from its foundation, and then claim to be the source of the teaching. Sorry, you can’t monopolize an idea that’s been around for 20 centuries. Nor can you harness the power of the message when you’ve removed it from the Power Himself. All you’ve done, in the end, is cut a flower off at the stem. It looks pretty and smells nice, but it will soon become something withered, dried, and dead, because you’ve severed it from its roots.

In any case, most self described feminists aren’t referring to spiritual equality anyway. They mean equality by its dictionary definition: Sameness. Outside of religious philosophy, two things are “equal” when they are the same. We hear a lot about this kind of equality, and, unless we’re listening to a math lecture, what we’re hearing is false and ultimately destructive. Mathematical equations have equals, but humans do not. We are not numbers; we are living, changing, vibrant entities. We are not equal to anyone else. I am not equal to you, you are not equal to me, men are not equal to women. That doesn’t mean one is superior to the other, it just means one is not the same as the other. This is an important point, and we are losing our ability to have lasting romantic relationships precisely because we have decided to pretend that human equality is exactly like algebraic equality.

You are not equal to me. You might be bigger, faster, smarter, more charming, more ambitious. You might be more honest, more courageous, more creative, and you might be more humble, which means you’d never point any of this out. We both have inherent worth and dignity, but you might be better than me in every other measurable way. We are not equal. We are not the same.

Men and women are not equal. They are not they same. There’s really no avoiding this fact, so Modern Liberators have instead set out to convince everyone that the inherent differences between men and women are meaningless and entirely superficial. Interesting thing, that feminism — it elevates women by telling them that every unique female trait is expendable and pointless. “There’s nothing special or different about you. Now you’re free! Congratulations!” Weak, gutless men absolutely love this idea. You should see all the emails I received from guys of that type. Here’s one example: “Matt, you’re such an idiot. “Chivalry” is bull sh*t. Why should I treat women any different from men?”

Uh, maybe because they ARE different, professor. But, sure, go ahead and treat your wife like a dude and see how long your marriage lasts. A guy who beats his wife is no worse than a guy who gets into a shoving match with his buddy, right? Again, good luck in your relationships, my friend. I’m just hoping for the day that our culture catches a glimpse of its reflection in the puddle of sewage on the sidewalk. Marriages are falling apart at a record pace, people are deathly afraid of commitment, and we’re raising a generation of kids who are terrified of getting married because they’ve never seen a healthy example of how it’s supposed to work. Think about that: there are millions of people in this country who have NEVER come in contact with a successful romantic relationship. That is absolutely chilling.

Yet we march on like we’ve got all the answers, even though our answers have been PROVEN wrong, time, and time, and time again. Marriages have become competitions. Rather than two DIFFERENT people coming together and filling DIFFERENT but complimentary roles, we instead end up with two factions battling for control and dominance. That ain’t marriage, that’s a civil war. People enter into this union without a clue as to what they are supposed to do or how it is supposed to work. They don’t like “gender roles,” so they try to carry on like their genders don’t exist. Generally, that strategy carries them right to the divorce lawyer. We all have to decide what’s best for us in our own marriages, but I don’t think it’s ever best to pretend that our spouse is an amorphous genderless blob.

Chivalry might be “old fashioned,” but the new fashion is damned hideous, and I’m not the kind of person who buys a new wardrobe just to keep up with the trends. Sure, these ideas about men protecting and providing for women might be old, like the horse and buggy. The new way, on the other hand, is more like an airplane — a crashed airplane, engulfed in flames, specifically. I have no interest in trying to explain these concepts to adult men who are too “enlightened” (read: pathetic, selfish) to actually be the man in their marriages, nor do I feel inclined to spend any more time defending the idea that being “the man” is, shockingly, different– not superior, different — from being “the woman.” It’s pretty easy to criticize a cartoon version of the past, but it’s hard to come up with answers for the present. These modern fools who tear down everything that smells of “tradition,” and every idea that pre-dates 1960, don’t have any answers. You need only look at what they’ve done to marriage to see that. All they have are buzzwords, and slogans, and feelings, and they can’t explain or define any of them.

I don’t idolize the past, but I’m not arrogant enough to outright dismiss the lessons of our grandparents, or to broadly veto the “democracy of the dead,” as Chesterton would say. I might be stubborn, but I’m pragmatic enough to look at the divorces, and the abortions, and the broken families and shattered lives, and think maybe — just maybe — we aren’t quite as enlightened as we think.

Something to think about, anyway.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

529 Responses to Men and women are not equal

  1. 63 says:

    This article has hit on some very important things. I feel like most things going wrong in this country right now pivot around this gender issue. I truly and deeply agree with you and it makes me relived to hear someone else as scared and angry as me about the while issue. There for awhile I was feeling like I was the crazy one but I see the whole world has gone mad! If more of us don’t start to care we are going to loose everything.

  2. yumicpcake says:

    I myself loved your article and took no offense at your ” I’m not a feminist”. However, I don’t believe you, as I am a feminist myself and read what you wrote. I do know about chivalry though. Chivalry, or the chivalric code, is the traditional code of conduct associated with the medieval institution of knighthood. Chivalry arose from an idealized German custom. It was originally conceived of as an aristocratic warrior code — the term derives from the French term chevalerie, meaning horse soldiery— involving, gallantry, and individual training and service to others. Over time its meaning has been refined to emphasise more ideals such as the knightly virtues of honour, courtly love, courtesy, and less martial aspects of the tradition. I think what you are talking about is more of opening doors and pulling out chairs maybe? I’m not sure. But those things were done for women back in the days where a woman wasn’t allowed to be educated or allowed to physically exert herself because it was considered to be detrimental to her uterus and would affect her ability to be barefoot and pregnant. I don’t think you mean it like that. I think you mean to be respectful and do right by the women in your life. But I also think you should look more into feminism because feminism isn’t trying to say that men and women are exactly the same physically, but we deserve all of the same rights and privileges. Feminism is the radical idea that women are human. Did you know that the Equal rights amendments have not been ratified in most of the 50 U.S. states for women yet? That women have still not been given the full human rights that men have had all along? You said ” See, son, you don’t have to be big and strong to be a man, although I think you will be one day. You don’t have to be “cool” or athletic. You don’t have to play guitar or fix cars. These are all fine things, but they don’t define a man. A man is defined by how he treats women, by how he keeps his promises, and by how he protects and serves the ones he loves. That’s what makes a man a man. My dad taught me that, he taught it by example. I pray I can do the same for you.” What you said to me means men are human beings….that’s feminist. Feminism says men are humans with more emotions that just anger and violence, who have self control. Whereas the patriarchal society says men are like animals who have no emotions, no self control, who should take what they want with force if necessary. That’s what men do. Dominate and control. A lot of men are more feminist than they think. If you think a woman has the right to work, go to school, vote, live on her own, to not be beaten or raped just because she’s breathing
    —That’s feminism!!

    • JSantorelli says:

      @yumicpcake: Feminism is not about seeing men as human beings. Why do feminists stand in the way of people like Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers trying to help boys in school. She has a whole book called “The War Against Boys” that accurately describes in detail how feminist groups are a road block in any effort to get support for helping boys in school. Young boys are more likely to drop out and not go to college than girls. Do you know what that means for crime rates? Well, feminists don’t care because they don’t fear men locked up in cages like animals. You cherry pick a few decent things women gathered to do but left out all the muck which is propagated by the upper echelon of feminist leaders. Feminists aggressively pursue pro-abortion policies and free contraceptives. I guess thinking with ones vagina is tolerable, but they have no problem lobbing insults at men thinking with their reproductive organ. Feminism overall is about double standards and extracting out of men what feminists think they deserve. Equality is the last thing on their minds especially when it means they have to give something up.

      • @JSantorelli, you seem so angry at anyone who even suggests a positive view of feminism. I am sorry you have clearly been hurt by some versions of feminism, but not all feminists hate men or see women as better than men or are money hungry or whatever your negative view is. I’m sorry you’ve been hurt, and your comments seem so angry and full of that hurt. Hopefully you interact with some positive versions of feminists in your life time.

        • JSantorelli says:

          @songofdeborah: And you seem quite naive about what feminism is really about. If all these groups wanted was justice, they wouldn’t have coined a separate term like “feminism” to bring about change. I have given numerous examples about how feminists actually destroy the lives of men but you seem to have the opposite problem of what you accuse me of. Do you hold the women standing in the way of improving education responsible for their actions? Do you hold the women that shut down discussion of finding a way for men to forgo their “unwanted paternity” just like women can forgo their “unwanted motherhood?” Do you hold the women responsible who enact sexual crime laws that deny men a right to due process? (see article titled “Obama Administration Scraps Free Speech on Campus”) You seem to get quite giddy over the “girls club” without much thought for severe consequences of it. I guess you don’t care much about supposed “patriarchy” when we reshape it as “matriarchy.” Yeah, the motto for your feminism is “its ok when we do it because we’re better than you.” That is the majority of feminism, not just some fringe group.

        • JSantorelli says:

          @songofdeborah: And you seem quite naive about what feminism is really about. If all these groups wanted was justice, they wouldn’t have coined a separate term like “feminism” to bring about change. I have given numerous examples about how feminists actually destroy the lives of men but you seem to have the opposite problem of what you accuse me of. Do you hold the women standing in the way of improving education responsible for their actions? Do you hold the women that shut down discussion of finding a way for men to forgo their “unwanted paternity” just like women can forgo their “unwanted motherhood?” Do you hold the women responsible who enact sexual crime laws that deny men a right to due process? (see article titled “Obama Administration Scraps Free Speech on Campus”) You seem to get quite giddy over the “girls club” without much thought for severe consequences of it. I guess you don’t care much about supposed “patriarchy” when we reshape it as “matriarchy.” Yeah, the motto for your feminism is “its ok when we do it because we’re better than you.” That is the majority of feminism, not just some fringe group.

        • Shelly says:

          Um, unwanted paternity is pretty easily avoided through condoms or, gasp, abstinence. It’s called personal responsibility. Really. She couldn’t have done it without you.

        • JSantorelli says:

          @Shelly: I could not agree with you more! That is why my preferred choice is abstinence. It comes with the added benefit of protecting a man against the irrational hysteria known as “female emotion” and the mind numbing feelings of attachment.

          That being said, however, as long as women have a second chance to prevent unwanted motherhood equality demands that men must too. That’s feminism right? Would you tell a woman contemplating abortion that “you should have used birth control or not had sex, too bad?” I think there mere suggestion of that would get any feminist hot under the collar. That is what I mean by double standards. They are OK with men only having one shot, but when it comes to women they are all for “second chances.”

          Nice try though ;-)

        • Shelly says:

          Actually, as an old women’s studies major, I feel that I can speak as a recovering feminist. I ascribe to the old school. Really old school. Google and read Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s “Solitude of Self” speech. That is what feminism started out as, and that is what it should be. It actually calls for all people to be self-reliant and responsible for the choices and actions in their lives. Now, when you call a woman hysterical for having feelings of attachment toward you after having shared your bed, or the alley wall (you sound like a total prince of a guy), she must be forgiven. She can’t have known you very well before. I don’t have much empathy for people who use each other. Your argument for being allowed, as the sperm donor, to decide to end the pregnancy of course would not hold up. Because it would be murder. As it is when a woman does it. But it is really hard to ignore that fact when you are forcing your decision on another person. Wait a minute, we do that every day with the fetus, but I digress. You inadvertently make a point. A man, angry because a woman was better at using him than he at using her, would not be good father material. Here’s an idea: why don’t we all try to tear ourselves away from our society of immediate gratification and face up to the facts. There is no such thing as cheap sex. It will cost you, maybe support payments, maybe an STD, maybe your self-respect, maybe your peace of mind if you choose abortion, or maybe the respect of others. We all have value as human beings, and if you use someone for your own selfish needs, it will come back to bite you in the ass somehow. From all of your posts throughout this discussion, you are very angry and feel very victimized by the big, ugly feminist movement. If you were operating from a position of honor and integrity, they couldn’t touch you. You have put yourself in the position of feeling screwed over by the choices and actions you have taken. You can’t control other’s actions, but you can control your reaction. Instead of being really angry with all women, why not work on why what you do with them doesn’t work? Learn, don’t blame. Do your own motives and actions bear scrutiny? And that was really the point of Matt’s article. But you’d have to be a pretty big man to be able to bear your share of the responsibility in any bad situation. Merle Streep would not have been boiling bunnies at Michael Douglas house in that movie if he hadn’t had elevator sex with her on a whim. See what I mean?

        • JSantorelli says:

          @Shelly: Thanks for the sermon, but its way off. For starters, I am abstinent, single, and do not date by choice. I have not hurt any woman, I do not wish any harm to women, and nor do I plan on ever giving a woman a chance to compromise me. The point of view I am coming from though is to help guys realize that women aren’t half as worth the trouble many think you all are (for all the reasons you mentioned and then some). I’ve seen guys allow themselves to be reduced to a pile of trash over some self-entitled woman, usually a product of the feminist movement. Look at Bill Clinton and David Petreaus. They made bad choices because they ascribed a higher value to woman than their own personal dignity and self-respect. People of their stature wouldn’t throw away their legacy unless they felt they felt something else had a higher value. Bill did it with a lowly intern and Dave did it with an otherwise nobody author. The fact that these men (regardless of their politics), with their achievements, felt those women could offer them anything is appalling to me as a man.

          Also to clarify, when I say a man should be able to “terminate his unwanted paternity” I mean legally, not physically. Feminism is about equality and as such a man should be able to walk into a “clinic,” fork over some small sum of money, and be relinquished of any responsibility to the woman / child. That is how women do it on their own so in the spirit of “equality” as feminists call it, lets make it equal! Perhaps if women knew a man could leave so easily she will think twice before sharing someone’s bed or alley. Women these days are almost as promiscuous as men because they know they have a way out or a personal bank account thanks to the unjust police power of the state.

          As far as Elizabeth Cady Stanton goes, I don’t care what she was or what she called herself. The bottom line is “feminism” carves out special consideration for women that no other group enjoys. You want equality? You want freedom? Well, declare you are equal and free then call it a day. That is how men do it. That is how the founding fathers in America do it. They don’t sit around a campfire waxing poetry about the rights of their reproductive organs. Apparently simple justice is “below women” such that many of you feel the need to shove your entitlement complex front and center on the stage of society. I’ve mentioned numerous ways in which feminism, specifically feminists, act maliciously and vindictively against men / boys. I’ve got a nice job and hold a Ph.D. in Materials Science and as a willfully celibate guy I really don’t give much a darn about feminism. I do however care about the future of my fellow man and the men younger than me are going to have it extremely bad because of feminism. If I only cared about myself I’d move to a small island nation and live like a king.

        • Shelly says:

          I respect your decision to remain abstinent, and I think it is the right one for you. I think you are way off in describing Clinton and Petreaus as valuing women over their legacies. They valued nookie over their legacies. I don’t think Clinton had any serious intentions towards Monica, do you? I don’t think you read the Elizabeth Cady Stanton speech, or you would not dismiss it out of hand as you did. Had you done so, you would have seen that all of the things that ECS was fighting for women to have, have come to pass. Mission accomplished. Feminism should disappear now. The final step is for both men and women to treat each other as they wish to be treated. The sexual revolution of the sixties did nothing but set the sexes against each other because it very deliberately destroyed the rules for engagement, as it were. The dating world is brutal, as Matt addresses in another blog. It is a system that is broken and cheapens everyone. You claim that Feminism has ruined all women for you whether they ascribe to it or not. The agenda is out there and any woman may employ that double standard whenever she wants. One thing that has changed the game is DNA testing. Men used to walk away from unwanted paternity all of the time, and it was not a point of honor with your gender. The double standard has just doubled back, that’s all. I agree with you that woman may behave just as badly as men. It is a pretty disgusting society we’ve got going on here. It is hard to find someone to root for. But You cannot deny that you are a misogynist. You have already proclaimed that women are not worth the effort and never worth the risk. When I say that I am a recovering women’s studies major, just let me say that I know from personal experience you can not walk around with that level of anger about society and be very happy. Buddha said that holding onto anger is like drinking poison and expecting your enemy to die.

        • JSantorelli says:

          @Shelly: Let me shed a little light on something from the male side of things. From day 1, a young boy is taught he is only worth what he earns and its usually never enough for the societal vultures that feed off of us (I’m not referring to just women here). No one, not even religious group really, bother to recognize or develop a sense of intrinsic worth in men. The only validation many men get is when a woman “offers herself.” Some guys think linearly and assume that more female offering = more validation. So it’s not really the nookie that Bill and Dave valued as much as I bet it was the sense of self-worth. We’re working on developing womens sense of self worth but no one cares to address the issue for men. Rather, women just want to label men as vile pigs and call it day forgetting their own troubles in this department quite quickly.

          I don’t consider myself much an angry person. I just think what feminism and feminists are / have done to our young men is disgusting. The fact that anyone can call themself one these days is appalling to me when you really look at it. So, I’m a misogynist because I want nothing to do with women emotionally? Look, if you met me on the street you wouldn’t even guess my views from it. I am cordial to women and have no qualms with equal pay, equal justice, etc. That is where I draw the line though. My thoughts on the subject are live and let live but don’t expect me to personally go the extra mile for you because I refuse. If that’s the definition of misogynist then I’ll get it tattooed. Last time I checked there was no law saying you had to let people feed off you emotionally or romantically.

        • dwnsimmons80 says:

          Hi Jsantorelli,

          Its been awhile!:) I’m glad to see that you are still fighting the good fight. ;)

          Look, I like you. You seem like a good guy. I think your overall message is right…yes, sometimes men are held to a different standard. I think women are held to a different standard too.

          But this is starting to get informing. Men are sleeping with women due to self esteem issues. Wow…all this time I thought it was lust and temptation. I never knew that each time I saw a man stare at a woman’s breasts he was really saying…please like me. You have all the answers. And according to you it seems women are the perpetrators and men are these mindless weak victims. Most men would be embarrassed by your view of them. Men are much stronger than you take them for. And women are not the villains you so unsuccessfully try and make them out to be.

        • JSantorelli says:

          @dwnsimmons80: Nice to see you back as well. Let me ask you this. WHY do think men men as able to be tempted by lust? Lust isn’t just some mysterious force that happens. If it was then we would be innocent because we couldn’t do anything about when in fact we can. The classic story of Adam and Eve teaches us a lot about sin. For starters, Adam and Eve prior to the fall lacked nothing. Yet, because they believed they did lack something (knowledge), it made room for sin to come into their lives. If men are offended by my comments then they prove my point. The truth hurts and often offends. If a man led a satisfying and fulfilling life lacking nothing, he would have no incentive to “acquire more.” He would be like a glass full of water, you cannot put more in without making a mess. He thus would not be subject to temptation. The problem is all people (men and women) believe they lack what’s necessary for a fulfilling life thus leading to temptation. Part of eliminating temptation is decoupling ones worth and value to worldly idols like money, power, and other people.

          Yes, I agree a double standard exist for both men and women. The breakdown though is that we seem to only care about those double standards as far as women are concerned. We actually make an effort to address the double standards for women, but no one gives a darn about men. This is my whole point. I laugh when sick feminist women make comments like “men are backwards” or “men are neanderthals” because they are about 90% of the reason men are stuck where we are. They spend more time and effort casting men as villains than sharing the resources they are using to make things “better” for women. Obamacare is a great example of a feminist payoff at the expense of men. Women got a whole lot of benefits from it that men didn’t get and men got stuck with the tab for those benefits. That dimwit Amanda Marcotte wrote an article “Seven Ways the Government Shutdown Will Hit Women Hardest” about how the recent government shutdown hurts women soooooo badly. Umm, selfish much? Most of what she wrote could have been said for men or women. She can’t even bring herself to acknowledge the other 50% of the population. She inadvertently confirmed that its mostly women that leach off the “government-husband.” Real “empowering!” She’s a typical feminist though, can’t see beyond the front of her nose.

  3. JSantorelli says:

    @songofdeborah: And you seem quite naive about what feminism is really about. If all these groups wanted was justice, they wouldn’t have coined a separate term like “feminism” to bring about change. I have given numerous examples about how feminists actually destroy the lives of men but you seem to have the opposite problem of what you accuse me of. Do you hold the women standing in the way of improving education responsible for their actions? Do you hold the women that shut down discussion of finding a way for men to forgo their “unwanted paternity” just like women can forgo their “unwanted motherhood?” Do you hold the women responsible who enact sexual crime laws that deny men a right to due process? (see article titled “Obama Administration Scraps Free Speech on Campus”) You seem to get quite giddy over the “girls club” without much thought for severe consequences of it. I guess you don’t care much about supposed “patriarchy” when we reshape it as “matriarchy.” Yeah, the motto for your feminism is “its ok when we do it because we’re better than you.” That is the majority of feminism, not just some fringe group.

  4. Well, all i can say is I’m so grateful to have discovered your blog and thrilled that your voice is reaching a wide audience, even if your email is attacked by vicious invertebrates who have no developed sense of history or tradition. Most people today are unable to hold conflicting or even varying ideas within their mind at once, thus this painfully boring “culture war” to which we are continually subjected by the clamoring secularists. It’s refreshing to see some young catholic voices in the blogosphere who can write convincingly about why “the old ways” matter.

  5. Pingback: Abnormal ≠ Crazy / Traditional Marriage and Reality | adisonsays's Blog

  6. Pingback: The Woman in Proverbs | elegance & candor

  7. Lbena04 says:

    I just finished watching the following video a few minutes before reading this post. I know it’s long but I think you will find some very interesting insights into feminism (and a bunch of other -isms) if you watch it: http://vimeo.com/m/63749370

  8. Pingback: Why Is It So Important To You? | bryan paul rouleau

  9. Sarah says:

    Thank you so much for posting this! You have very eloquently explained an issue I’ve had a difficult time communicating to people–partly because they didn’t want to hear it, but also because I didn’t have these words. I thought there weren’t other “old fashioned” people who still thought this way. Keep it up!! Don’t let the hate mail get you down :)

  10. Greg says:

    A load of BS, really. This person doesn’t even give any specifics of what he means by “gender roles”. He also clearly doesn’t seem to grasp that in 2 incomes households, everyone helps with everything. Cleaning, making food, laundry, earning money… Anyway, this guy may think he is being controversial or whatever, but he isn’t because there are no specifics here. This is just an “anti-liberal” rant and it has been done much better by others. Have the courage to say what you mean when you believe men should act a particular way and women in other ways. This is a wimpy blog post. If you think one person should work and one stay home, you are delusional about the economy. If you think both partners should work, but only one clean, do dishes, and laundry, then that is just asshole.

    • Liz G says:

      Actually often both people needing to work has more to do with personal choices than the economy. If people weren’t so wrapped up in the newest and biggest, there could be a lot more single income families.

      • Greg says:

        What is your point. People are free to compete and consume as they see fit. There are plenty of single income families out there who are ‘not wrapped up’ in things and still don’t need silly – and as yet completely unspecified by this author – gender roles let alone particular chores assigned by genitals.

      • Andrea says:

        I agree that many families that earn two incomes could get by one one – but it is not always the need for “newest and biggest” that causes a spouse to want to work. It is often the fulfillment that comes from pursuing a passion out in the world. I have many friends who are stay at home moms and who love it. I also have many friends who work outside of the home. For them, the joy they experience by pursuing their careers is brought back to their children and creates a warmth and joy in their homes. Everyone is different, and in our “first world” existence the pursuit of a passion as a career is one of the blessings we may choose. Staying home with our children is another blessing we may choose. Either choice can bring goodness to other individuals and to the world at large.

  11. Thanks! A book is in the works! Will let u knw when i print!
    kredyt na dowód http://www.lixe24.pl/

  12. Reblogged this on Why I Am Not A Feminist and commented:
    Matt Walsh is awesome.

  13. I agree with your take on marriage and the “civil war” aspect of it. It just makes me very sad for my daughters.

  14. You have no discussed any specific gender differences that make it such that chivalry is necessary.

    “A guy who beats his wife is no worse than a guy who gets into a shoving match with his buddy, right?” This is a ridiculous straw man. As everyone knows, beating someone is not the same as shoving, so obviously no one would agree. However, a “guy who beats his wife” IS as “a bad a guy who beats his husband” or a “wife who beats her husband.” Beating your romantic partner is terrible regardless of gender.

    “[G]o ahead and treat your wife like a dude and see how long your marriage lasts.” How about treating your wife the way she wants to be treated, regardless of gender roles? What does treating someone “like a dude” even mean? My husband and I both treat each other with kindness and respect. Gender schmender.

    • You haven’t discussed any specific gender differences that make it such that chivalry is necessary.

      “A guy who beats his wife is no worse than a guy who gets into a shoving match with his buddy, right?” This is a ridiculous straw man. As everyone knows, beating someone is not the same as shoving, so obviously no one would agree. However, a “guy who beats his wife” IS as bad as a guy who beats his husband or a wife who beats her husband. Beating up your romantic partner is terrible regardless of gender.

      “[G]o ahead and treat your wife like a dude and see how long your marriage lasts.” How about treating your wife the way she wants to be treated, regardless of gender roles? What does treating someone “like a dude” even mean? My husband and I both treat each other with kindness and respect. Gender schmender.

  15. (sorry, for the double comment)

  16. Lvri-Ny says:

    When it comes to communication, interests, philosophies, diet, TV shows, ways to spend a Sunday afternoon, what appetizers to share, or pretty much any category where the slightest probability of debate between opposite sexes can occur, bet your bottom dollar that it will. Among those debatable categories lies the concept of sexual stimulation and arousal.

    There is some validity in the saying “Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus.” Not in the fact that opposing sexes ancestry stems from planets so far apart their distance is measured in light years, but in that our chemical makeup isn’t even the same.

    Men, ever since the day of the cave man, have had this predisposed notion that it is in the best interest of humanity for them to spread their seed and create as many replicas of themselves as possible. While adversely, the woman, biologically and spiritually possesses an innate ability to understand that, if sexual relations do occur, their role would be to nurture, guide, and dedicate their lives for the child.

    It’s understandable how the idea of bearing a child in your womb for nine months could put a damper on the sexual stimulation or arousal a woman would normally feel if all outcomes were equal. The man on the other hand, who has limited responsibility in bearing a child, does not have the same hesitation when it comes to having sex for that very reason. In other words, it’s much easier to sexually stimulate a man than a woman.

    The cycle continues today. If a man comes home after a bad day at work where everything went wrong yet the woman makes sexual advances, the man instantly becomes stimulated and would be happy to welcome the escape from their troubles. Now take a woman, throw some traffic in her day, mix it with the local Starbucks getting her order wrong, and top it off with the fact that she has a meeting after work hours to go over the new bathroom policy in the office, and you give birth to the saying “hell hath no fury like a women’s scorn.” Sex is the last thing on her mind. In fact, make the same sexual advances which previously worked on you on her, but do it at your own risk.

    Sex just isn’t looked at the same by the opposing sexes. Men just need to be touched while women need to be heard, seduced, and romanced, whether married or dating.

    A well educated Martian should know that if he wants to give in to his biological excitement and pursue a sexual encounter, it won’t be easy. Sex isn’t as casual for women as it is for a man, which brings up an interesting concept… It’s amazing that men and women ever get together…

    • JSantorelli says:

      @Lvri-Ny: The problem with your description is that it does not apply to all men or all women. There are some women that are rabid horn dogs and get offended if a man tells them no. I however do not have such a voracious need for sex. In fact if I died a virgin it wouldn’t bother me in the least. Your assuming that all men and are cookie cutter models which is not true. If a man wants his offspring to survive he needs to invest the time just like a woman. Reproduction is about getting your offspring to survive to preserve your legacy. It would be as dumb for a man to throw the kid to the wind as a woman. Men and women parent differently and kids need exposure to both. Too much of one and not the other spells trouble. What you subscribe to is a confirmation bias that has existed in evolutionary biology for decades. The latest unbiased research has found that when females are free to roam, they are the pursuers.

    • Linda says:

      not sure what you are basing these “facts” on. for a start I know you are not a woman because you seem to think pregnancy is an automatic sexual shut down for the woman. I can assure you its not, it is more often the opposite. Also in my experience women are much more casually sexual than men, they just have to be more quiet about it because they get labelled “sluts” for the same behaviour men get labelled “studs” for.
      Also less is known about cave men than you think and all those csrtoon ideas you have of cave men living in caves and knocking women out with bomby knockers and carrying them back to the cave for sex where the woman stays put until shes impregnated , given birth and raised the child…all made up! cave men didn’t even live in caves!
      ALSO …what study are you basing a mans immediate positive response to sex on and womens lack of it? media seterotypes? I can tell you now that in reality neither are true.
      AND..one more thing…if a woman is touched in the right place she is actually MORE EASILY stimulated than men!

  17. marc says:

    il point out that treating women differently from men does not mean respecting them more or treating them better than men, there is an idea going around that women are somehow deserving of respect based on their gender alone wish is bullshit, people earn respect but women get it handed to them on a platter because they are “women”

    that in itself is double standards which is probably why you were called a “pussy worshiper”

    • JSantorelli says:

      @marc: Totally agree. There is too much “female worship” going on yet it is not reciprocating by women. Women do not honor their men in a comparable magnitude that men honor women. We are led to think men mistreat women because women like to complain everything they perceive as a slight. Men on the other hand are taught to “suck it up.” When a man does put his foot down and say enough is enough, women don’t want to loose the spotlight so pandemonium ensues. Consequently, to silence women, many men just give in and accept being treated like a dog.

  18. Pingback: From Around Blog Land | Life with You

  19. Jessica says:

    This is a masterpeice

  20. Delaney says:

    Thanks for this.

    Also, do you have clones of yourself available? If not, where can I find more men like you?

  21. Pingback: Quiet Warriors Quotes | Delightful Oak

  22. linda says:

    It is not that hard to understand that feminists fighting for equality are not after being clones of men or one man?! Or that we are fighting for an equal right to be talked to like a dude (although nothing wrong with that) you R being completely ignorant to the very clear fact that feminists want equality in both respect and rights. Neither respect or rights are gender dependant, and should not vary on a case by case basis (unless we R talking evil/incarcerated people…but we R not. We R talking men and women). So your arguement is futile and ignorant. And no,you cannot be a feminist if you are pro life…for the simple reason that you aim to remove a womans rights in order to treat her as an object…a vesicle for the rights of a non viable embryo, while forcing her into a potentially dangerous situation (yes pregnancy and childbirth are dangerous). You cannot claim even respect or chivalry if you think its ok to force a woman to be an objectified grow tank for something that hasn’t even grown a mind of its own yet. Think about that…FORCE a woman to go through a painful dangerous experience because YOU prefer her too, because all she is, is an object USED to carry a few cells to a full term human being. But yea, your arguement holds no water.

  23. E-man says:

    I absolutely love this! I am laughing out loud at how jsantorelli is trying to use logic and reasoning while addressing women about the most sensitive issue in their lives. Women do not think logically nor do they reason at all like men do. Instead, women almost universally act upon emotion. They are incapable of reading what you write, regardless of how many examples and analogies you use (which have been great in my own humble opinion). Feminists have allowed the term to define them. They do not care about what ripple effect their actions have as long as they get the spotlight and get to show how they got what they set out to get, whether they deserve it or not. If it happens to negatively affect a man, that is well within the acceptable limits. It is the same as affirmative action. I am somehow supposed to feel guilty about slavery and give unfair advantages to blacks because my great great great great grandfather’s views may have accepted the notion of slavery. I never had a slave. I do not know anyone who did. I am supposed to accept the idea that I am somehow liable for what happened prior to 1865? Same with feminism. Women demand they be treated the same as men but they are NOT the same as men. Why should I be made to feel that I have to treat a person a certain way because they have a vagina? I treat people how they demonstrate to me that I should treat them. Come off as demanding and bossy and you will get the fight of your life. Come off as pleasant and respectful and you will get the same in return. Oh, I also hold the door for old people at restaurants or supermarkets. I have yet to have an elderly person get offended and demand they open their own doors. It is respect. It is a good thing. This seriously screwed up world so desperately needs common courtesy. I like the idea that I was taught by my grandmother that “a lady should act like and be treated like a lady”. Go ahead, feminists…tell me how backward my grandmother was. She defined “a lady” and was proud to be one. I am sure my grandfather would agree. That is undoubtedly what attracted him to her.

  24. Ri Ri says:

    ” Yes, men and women are “equal” in intrinsic worth; they have immortal souls and are endowed by God with a dignity and value that can not be diminished or reduced. This is the only sort of “equality” that can ever exist between people, or between genders, and it is the only sort of “equality” that really matters. Because we are all “equal” in the spiritual sense, we should all treat each other with love and respect. I don’t need feminism to tell me this, Christianity has been teaching it for two thousand years. I can’t stand these modernist movements that come along, borrow a little slice of Christian philosophy, uproot it from its foundation, and then claim to be the source of the teaching. Sorry, you can’t monopolize an idea that’s been around for 20 centuries.”

    Its an idea that predates Christianity and 20 centuries as well.

  25. colbri11 says:

    I am no feminist. I am not equal to my husband, we are different. We are different in the way we percieve things, how we nurture and discipline our children, we are different in our emotions and reactions, we each have qualities that can’t compare to that of the other, and that is why it works. We lean on eachother, we celebrate our individual strengths, and compensate for each other’s weaknesses. That is how we became one as God intended. Do we sometimes have arguments, and sometimes have knock down drag out fights? We sure do, but that is just because we are not equals, that is because of the differences that I have highlighted above. Now the next statement I am going to make is more controversial than the first statement I made in this post, MY HUSBAND IS THE HEAD OF OUR HOUSEHOLD. I know, it’s shocking, it is old fashioned, in fact it is so old fashioned it is biblical. That statement does not mean that my husband does not seek my counsel, it doesn’t mean that I have no voice in our marriage, it just means that he shoulders the responsibilities that a man should, and I submit to and support his role in our family as a woman should. We make decisions together, but I trust that he will lead us through our life. I do not presume to know what it feels like to be a man in this world, just like he does not presume to know what it feels like to be a woman in this world. His role of protector , leader, and provider in our family is very important to him, just like my role of nurturer and supporter is important to me. I do work outside of the home, I am a registered nurse, but my husband is still the primary bread winner in our family, not because he makes more money than I do, because he doesn’t, but because he shoulders the responsibilities that are innate to a man. I strive daily to be like the blessed woman of Proverbs 31. That does not make me weak, as some of you will inevitably think, it makes me stronger with him than I could ever be without him. We both together try to be the husband and wife that we are commanded to be in Ephesians 5: 22-33. I know that he loves me as Christ loved the church, and I submit to him as the church should submit to Christ. Sometimes we struggle with that, but that does not change the fact that we both believe that this is how it should be. We are different, we are unique in our individual roles in our marriage and family, but we are both important, we need eachother and our differences, our children need our each of us and our differences. Together we can teach our boys to become gentlemen and how to embrace their unique duties as men of character, men of God, and we can teach our daughter to embrace her unique role and differences from men, to become a Godly woman. Neither one of us can teach our children to be these things without the other. No marriage is perfect, but I think that if we all embraced the fact that we are not equal, we could better reap the benefits that marriage has to offer, we could truly become one flesh as we are commanded to become.

Comments are closed.