Apparently feminist prefer chivalrous men over wokebros

[BalletBunting]

According to this article: www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/women-who-stray/201812/feminists-think-sexist-men-are-sexier-woke-men

I'm v lucky to have DP who's pretty sound on sexism, but I'd still take a traditional 'chivalrous' male over a beardy pro porn/prostituion, pro erosion of women's spaces woke bro any day of the week

(Opens door for OP).

Hang on, I thought we were all supposed to be shouting at men who open doors for us. I can't keep up (and yes, all of stories linked above most definitely happened).

uglyswan - those articles are ridiculous. I think it's intriguing how lefty men seem intent on challenging 'traditional' ideas about gender, but only when it benefits them.

They want to split the bill and yet earn more. They don't want the pressure of being a 'provider' yet they still expect women to perform reproductive and sexual labour on male terms. They will virtue signal about allying with women over #MeToo, while insisting that women that want to preserve their spaces are in face bigots!

Get your coat, freespeecher, you've pulled .

I wonder if (cynicism alert) it's partly because (CF Germaine Greer's comment that we can never entirely escape our conditioning, the best we can manage is to recognise it's there) many of us suspect when push comes to shove that all men are sexist to some degree, and we'd sooner have the honest ones than the wolf in sheep's clothing dude bros who pretend to be feminists only to bail out as soon as an issue of principle looks like it might cost them personally.

I think they’re both sexist, but the chivalric sexism seems mostly benevolently intended while the woke-bro sexism seems to be overt angry misogyny.

TirisfalPumpkin - very good point. I think this is where sexism and misogyny diverge. The former is a system which says women are less than which is obviously bad, although most/all men reinforce. The latter however is true hatred of women, which is displayed by a sizeable minority (including many woke bros)

we'd sooner have the honest ones than the wolf in sheep's clothing dude bros

Exactly this. I’ve got a bit of a soft spot for twinkly eyed middle aged man style chivalry. They’re all sexist, but at least that type are reasonably polite and will hold the door for you

I deal with suppliers at work sometimes. The sales people are invariably men. The chivalrous types at least do a decent job of looking like they’re enjoying talking to me, where the other type often seem to be struggling with poorly suppressed rage that they have to be polite to a woman

There is that odd patriarchal male self regulation in chivalry too isn't there, the code of practice among men that they will insist on manners and chivalrous behaviour from other men and boys to women as well.

The opposite happens with the woke bros who duck and cover or wind each other up to increasing acts of aggression and violence like a pack of hyenas on the prowl.

That's a good point Pickled.

My personal experience is that there are a few genuinely non sexist men out there, whose default setting is to see women as equal in humanity to men.

There are some out and out misogynists.

Then there are men who will elevate you to "honourary male human being" status when they get to know you - which is bloody annoying on one level, but pragmatically useful on another.

Then there are men who pretend they believe in equality but are just pretending. (Jackie Fleming did some great cartoons on this.)

There needs to be more in the article about what these supposedly non sexist men are like that we don't go for, instead of it just being assumed they are generally superior to the sexist ones.

When it comes to a physical confrontation a ‘chivalrous’ man isn’t going to stand by when a man in a dress assaults a woman at a protest (eg Edinburgh last week), while a woke dude bro is likely to cheer them on.

A chivalrous man isn’t going to cheer on a trans athlete stealing women’s titles or pounding her into the ground in a martial arts contest.

A chivalrous man is going to give up his seat to a pregnant woman, whether that woman identifies as female or not.

It might be patronising, but chivalry recognises their are physical differences between men and women.

It might be patronising, but chivalry recognises their are physical differences between men and women

The problem is that they almost always seem to believe in intrinsic mental differences between men and women too. And it always seems to be some variation of women being temperamentally suited to cleaning toilets and changing nappies while men take care of the other stuff

Precisely, Bernard. "Chivalry" is undoubtedly a double edged sword.

Also both groups are extremely guilty of othering, that's how they cultivate Madonna/Whore complexes enabling them to pay for sex whilst protectively fathering daughters.

The compartmentalisation is the problem. It undermines any chance of empathy.

I would say I feel this way, generally speaking. I used to work in a very male environment with men who were often on the macho side, certainly not PC, often working class. There were of course people who were jerks, like anywhere. But with everyone else, they were just as likely to be nice, and there was never a sense that somehow maleness and femaleness were regressive ideas.

I also don't know that I'm happy with opposing woke with sexist. Lots of people who aren't "woke" just take people as they are.

On a level speaking as a man it’s easier to just default to a chivalric base. Not because I particularly believe in it with regards to men/women specifically. What it should be about is that those who are stronger and more capable should be protecting and supportive of those who aren’t, and not in a way that enables or keeps people down.

I actually quite dislike when men cherry pick aspects of chivalry they like and discard the parts they don’t. Especially when they make a performance of it. Additionally chivalry is also about being honest and true to your word. Too many men will do the open door bit but couldn’t keep their word if their life depended on it. I also don’t think this ethos is peculiar to men either. Plenty of strong women have had my back when I’ve been in need of it, and I’ll go up to bat for men who need some backup.

I think I prefer a man who isn't a sexist git in any way shape or form. In the absence of a lot of those running about, I shall probably stick with women.

My husband is a probably a chivalrous sexist. He's never had to provide for me (nor me him) but it caused him a great deal of distress once when his business wasn't doing so well and he hated the idea of failing me and my son (which if it had happened simply meant we would have had only my income, which would have been fine). He definitely thinks men should be providers. This is a bit odd given that in his professional life he comes across so many women who vastly outearn the average man, including me.

I knew he felt that way though and I picked him as the man I wanted to have children with as I was sure that if our relationship soured he would never shirk his emotional and financial responsibilitied as a father.

Violence, aggression and swearing by women shocks him more than similar behaviour by men. Tbh I feel the same. He does the holding doors, walking nearest the street , carrying bags even when there is no need thing.

He is vehemently opposed to prostitution and porn.

Occasionally he gets more worked up about things than I do. E.g the "beach body ready" ads which he thought were terrible whereas I just thought , what a load of nonsense, as if I'm going to pay any attention to that.

Maybe it turns out that people, including men, are complex. Including feminists as well... who do not all have uniform ideas. Bottom line being for me that I'll go for a man who I believe respects women. That may or may not involve opening doors! But it certainly involves a thought process being evident in which they believe women to be individual human beings rather than possessions or objects or a reflection of various masculine desires.

Psychology Today is such a pile of disingenuous crap.
This quote he uses - "“Dating male feminists turned out to be one of the least empowering decisions I’ve ever made.” —Kate Iselin" comes from an article that clearly talks about how self-identified male feminists are anything but:
"But men looking for feminist-sanctioned romance tend to fall in to one of two categories: those who use our attraction as a sign of approval and seek out trophy feminists to clear their conscience of any inherent patriarchal wrong-doing, and outright predators who employ a bare-bones knowledge of feminist discourse to target any young woman whose politics so much as graze the notion of sex-positivity"

And let's end with this nonsense:
"for now, perhaps this research can help us to stop attacking sexist men as being misogynistic tools of the patriarchy, and recognize that these social dynamics exist due to the choices of both men and women, for reasons other than power, hatred, or control." Sexist men are sexist because women WANT them to be! Yes, I know I said earlier that women consider it a trade-off and find sexist men patronising but just figure they're more likely to be dependable, but hopefully you've forgotten that by the time I got to this bit.

There is the cliche that women like nice (not woke) guys to be friends with but often date macho jerks. There does seem to be some truth to that, with younger women in any case, and I think it has nothing to do with respect or dependability. And I suppose its not very encouraging to younger, nice men.

@Goosefoot There is the cliche that women like nice (not woke) guys to be friends with but often date macho jerks. There does seem to be some truth to that
Is there truth to it? The link in the article is to one study of 128 undergraduates. He also mentions 'anecdotes', that gold standard of science.

Is there truth to it?

In my personal observation, there is some truth to the cliche. I suppose it's to be expected, younger people often make bad choices because they are inexperienced. And macho jerks are exciting and can seem romantic, plus they are willing to lie.

As far as the study, I don't know. I don't tend to take Psychology today seriously, most of what they publish is utter crap. I do think that its true to my experience that woke men aren't particularly more likely to be kind or respectful.

Actually, thinking of the data business vs anecdotes, I don't really put much weight on psychology or social science research anyway. I wouldn't say no weight but so much isn't reproducible even if it is good quality. Anecdotes are important though as they give a sense of how the data might be interpreted, which otherwise might just be based on the experiences of the researcher.

Articles like this are often most interesting because they make us stop and think about the topic when we might have just made a straightforward assumption. Not because its really hard irrefutable data.