April 2, 2009 What’s good for the gander…
Ok, here I am at work, and I’ve stumbled across Miranda Devines salivating revival of last months’ news – Chicks Should Put Out More.
Despite the fact this shit has been said incessantly for hundreds of years in millions of contexts, right wing neo conservatives seem to think it’s a fucking revolution.
What gets to me right, is that the same fucking suspects are the ones claiming that chicks should just DEAL WITH REALITY, that after a dude has boned them he has little to no interest in them anymore and is busy fantasising about his next wank over a preteen tennis star now that he’s rooted you and you’re spoiled goods. (Sam in the City)
Seriously, how OFTEN have we heard that men’s desire is to ‘kill the elephant’. Once it’s dead, you don’t need to hunt it anymore. Seriously. I hear this shit all the time. Chicks need to deal. Men want to pursue you, but once they’ve rooted you, you’re a dead elephant. NEXT!!
Right. So. There we have it. Men don’t want marriage! Right? They want to bone a succession of hot chicks, and once you’ve had the dick, they have no interest in you. Got that message? NOW: GET ON YOUR KNEES AND LIKE IT BITCH.
So when I hear THIS:
“What makes women think that halfway through the game they can change the rules to suit themselves and expect the male to take it?”
I. JUST. WONDER: You want chicks to put out like when you first met them and if they don’t they changed the rules and NO FAIR.
Well then, let me just ask DO YOU TREAT HER like you did when you were trying to woo her? Ten years into your marriage do you get giddy when you’re going to see her? Do you think of ways to amuse her? Little stories to tell? Do you daydream about how when you’ll get home you’ll slide your hands down her waist and kiss that spot behind her ear that always makes her melt? Do you spend weeks planning her next birthday celebrations? Do you send sexy emails full of promises?
Is she a focal point of your life? Do you find ways to constantly let her know how much she means to you? That she can still make you nervous? That she’s beautiful and desirable? That you think she rocks pretty hard? Do you ensure you come up with ways for you to spend mutually fulfilling time together? To plan dates?
Cos honestly? You’re expecting HER to not change the rules. But you did, didn’t you? When you decided that you and her were ‘done’ dating, that now you’d really rather she shut her yapping face while you cracked a tinny and watched the footie with the blokes?
So Devine thinks she’s *got us* when she says “HA! Men and women spend equal time working when you take into account paid work and housework, so CHICKS HAVE NO EXCUSE”.
Well I’d say it was always about more than the fucking housework. Look around. Women are pretty seriously disrespected in this country (nay, this universe, but when it comes to sexist crap Aussies Do It Better), wives in particular. (And even if it *was* about housework shit, well the dude gets MONEY and RESPECT and ADULT SOCIALISATION and ACHIEVEMENT from paid work whereas when you bust your arse to do the homework and the dude comes home and barely acknowledges it and treats you like an unkempt pet with the sexual attractiveness of a used toilet brush? Not the same) So really, let’s level the playing field here a little.
Before you whinge that chicks ‘changed the rules’ let’s just ask if you’re still playing by the same rules. Cos chaces are she wanted to shag you then because you were charming and paid attention and flirted and joked and gave her time and energy and never talked shit about other hot chicks or how sexless wives are. So if you’re not treating her the same way you did then FUCK OFF with your ‘I’m owed hot sex’ or else she’s changed the fucking rules shit.
Devine’s addtion to the ‘wisdom’ is ‘desire is a choice’. Yeah? So if I gave up on men cos I thought I’d get more love and attention from footwear I could ‘choose’ to get lusty over an old Volley? Desire has to be activated you toolbag. It’s activated by the play between people. (Unless your attitude is the chick should be a preteen porn star for desire to be activated and desire is for the dudes to induce them to lower themselves to root something before rolling over and there again I think we’ve hit on a problem in that this is unlikely to whip up a fervour of enthusiastic lovemaking from the wife).
So in the spirit of what’s good for the goose…let me anticipate that the objection to the above scenario will be ‘Oh but why should men HAVE to act like they still desire her like they used to’ – well DESIRE IS A CHOICE REMEMBER so get choosy with it! If you wanna argue that we have to then you fucking have to too.
So let’s just ask this: do these men still pursue their women as if they were dating? Cos that’s when the chicks decided to shag them. Otherwise…is not that false advertising?? Did not THEY change the rules? Oh, this logic can go both ways dudes!
See the thing is, I reckon if you’re going into a long term relationship it should really be cos you’re well into the other person. If it’s not, please for the love of fuck, break up with them and move the fuck on. Because if you ARE really into them, if you think they’re pretty fucking awesome, if you remember to REMEMBER that, if you invest in making them feel like the sexiest being to walk the earth, if you invest time in making sure you get the time you need together, then really that pays off. If it doesn’t and things aren’t working – LEAVE.
Let’s just stop and take a moment here. Marriage (with the occassional long term monogamous live in relationship) seems to be the thing that unites these complaints.
Apparently outside of this type of relationship women can go ‘WOOOHOOO’ again over sex. So…did anyone stop to ask whether maybe (since apparently men abhor marriage and chicks just *do* stop having sex) marriage or monogamy was the problem?
Marriage the institution that has treated women as chattel? Marriage the institution designed to provide men with meals, a housekeeper, sproggins that he just has to bounce a ball with to be considered a superhero while Mum’s just a worn out old nag? Marriage that provides men with a substitute to their hand to keep them warm at nights and just like their hand they don’t have to spend any time at all ensuring the woman feels desired and appreciated in order to claim their dues?
Marriage which says it’s A-o-fucking-k to deride women, to rank and compare the hotness of All Those Chicks I am NOT Married To in front of wife/kids/family/friends…whenever and wherever, marriage where you joke about sexless shrew nagging bitch wives? Marriage the institution that men LOVE to whine about, LOVE to act like it’s a prison sentence? Marrige the institution compared unfavourably with slow and painful death?
Cos I’ve got to tell you that if I fell head over heels for someone who lit up when they saw me, then we got married or shacked up and somewhere along the line they just stopped. Just stopped, stopped seeing me, stopped respecting me, stopped caring how I felt? If I spent years with that someone and heard him making tired and shitty jokes about going back home to the prison warden, if I heard him talk as if it really didn’t matter if I was there or not, if I heard him think it was ok to talk about how fucking hot some teenage kid was in front of me, and saw reflected that he saw me as sexless, frumpy, nothing to him and just a convenience or a habit and then he expected me to roll over and let him ‘give it to me’? I’d not only NOT want to shag him, I think I’d want to scream in his face that he was a self absorbed bastard with his head up his arse and that staying was killing me – and potentially would daydream about a cartoon-style smack to the face with a shovel replete with ‘boiioiioiing’ noise and face imprint.
I’d like to think I’d be OUT OF THERE if I’d tried to address it and the Other had refused to engage or work on it. But I can see how stuck people get. And women’s financial dependance is STILL a very real issue. As is women’s upbringing that says they should stay, they should care for everyone, they shouldn’t expect more, what do they think they’re some kind of princess?
Again, let me anticipate the objection: OH but MEN have this experience too! Should they leave? Well, ideally what I’d like is to see both parties making an effort. If it’s still not working for one, then yes, I’d advise that ending a relationship is better than staying and despising them. The point is that if people made and maintained an effort from the beginning this may not happen. And the other point is that even when we’re told men HATE marriage, it destroys them, it sends them broke, it’s hell, it’s prison and women change the rules then WHY does no one say ‘Down With Marriage!’? No no, easier to blame the chicks.
Argh. I’ve run out of steam here and am just sad again.
Anyway, so if we’re going to be banging on about Evil Chicks Who Change the Rules, well what’s good for the gander is good for the goose right? If you want to whinge about women changing the rules, well pony up boys, are YOU still playing by the same rules? If not maybe we need a different kind of conversation whereby A LOT needs to change, not just chicks putting out more.
Tags: Bettina Arndt, men 'owed' hot sex just for having a penis!, Miranda Devine, women not 'owed' anything
- 13 comments
- Posted under Uncategorized
Permalink #
Tricky
said
Way I see it I male /female relationship have evolved to a point in western marriages where now BOTH of them are in it by choice. The little problem of female happiness, sexually, mentally or physically has never really had any thought or real effort put into before. Now we are at the crossroads and it HAS to be considered so human relationships can evolve to the next level. Neocons are pathetically scared of change and keep recited this crap cause they want go back to where they didn’t have to think about this hard stuff. It is much easier to pathologise and demonise the female. Suck it up and shut up bitch type advice.
A common complaint BA et al raise is the men need sex to feel love. If men are feeling unloved in a relationship there needs to be some serious communication. Nothing is as painful as feeling lonely when you are in a relationship. But women are overwhelmingly responsible for the emotional health of the relationship – why aren’t men today learning the skills of intimacy and communication where no sex is involved? Seems the patriarchy only allows men to relate intimately to other human beings through violence or sex. Things like sensuality in men is treated with suspicion or corrupted into porno sleaze.
Permalink #
audreydarling
said
I don’t know how you can stand to read that crap, I started and just sort of exploded *sigh*
I mean what happens if we all become fuckbots like MD wants and men get all the sex they need? Nothing thats what, big fucking deal.
Jeez.
Permalink #
attack_laurel
said
Awesome response. I read all those dreadful woman-blaming articles with amazement, since I have medical issues that dim my sexual response, yet my husband and I are more in love than ever (12 years married, 15 together). We cuddle, talk, and tell each other how much the other matters constantly. You’re dead right – it’s not sex, it’s communication. Do I wish I wanted sex more? Damn straight. And sometimes I push myself past the physical issues because I crave the connection, but my Hub would be horrified if he thought I was having sex just to please him.
Er, yes. TMI, sorry.
What is wrong with these men that they respect their partners so little that they don’t care if something that fucking intimate is mutual or not? Women who buy into the patriarchal line are even more hateful about it, like they’re trying to get patted on the head for saying “see? See? I did what you told me to do, aren’t I a good girl?”. Ugh.
Permalink #
Mountain dew
said
Fantastic Post!!! Agree with all of your points. Have been trying to put many of these points onto the various smh blogs on this topic, but its like shouting at a gail force wind… most people just can’t (or won’t) hear you. And very few men have the ability to recognise their opinion on this topic is completely unrecontructedly patriarchal…. sigh…. I guess its good that this issue gets an airing, but how far if we really come if the main male apologists in the media are female…
Permalink #
Rebekka
said
“Way I see it I male /female relationship have evolved to a point in western marriages where now BOTH of them are in it by choice. ”
Oh yes? So are little boys dressing up as grooms and fantasising about their wedding day now?
Permalink #
Tricky
said
good reply today
http://www.smh.com.au/news/lifeandstyle/lifematters/men-putting-women-off-sex/2009/04/03/1238261768398.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
I like twisty’s definition of the patriarchy dividing humans into 2 species.
“H. sapiens is actually two distinct species, Homo masculomacho, (”regular guys”), and Monachus gluteus rosus, (alternatively known as “uteropods”).”
Damn those ungrateful uteropods!
Rebekka – by choice I meant in most western countries the majority are not forced into marriage and they have the option to leave the marriage if it is so untenable.
Permalink #
Rebekka
said
Yes, I certainly agree that we’re not literally forced into marriage. But ‘choice’ is problematic within the constructs of patriarchy.
Do women choose marriage? Or is it that we’re conditioned to think it is the pinnacle of all we can possibly achieve?
It’s supposed to be the happiest day of your life, you’re a princess, etc etc etc. Little girls fantasise about their wedding day. Little boys, don’t.
I guess ‘both by choice’ to me implied some sort of equality in going into it.
Permalink #
Tricky
said
Yes I can see that – I had a friend who encourage into a horrible marriage because that is “what good Christian girls do”, to refuse would have cause a drama and go against her family’s patriarchal values. But she still could have bucked the system if she wanted to..
But for myself I can remember deciding at age 8 that marriage was a bizarre & illogical activity.
Adults assured me I’d change my mind – 30 years later it still aint happen. Fallen in love, had wonderful relationships, etc but still see it as bizarre and illogical waste of time & money.
I literally don’t get the fantasy of a whole white wedding thing – as a fantasy goes, it as boring a batshit to me. So I find it really hard to understand it, even when I’m told it is a common thing. I’ve met probably a couple women in my life that might fall into that category – but then maybe I don’t associate with or attract women in that sphere of influence.
Permalink #
fuckpoliteness
said
*But she still could have bucked the system if she’d wanted to*
Yeee-ess, to some degree. She could have *bucked the system* if the threat of negative consequences wasn’t bad enough. And conditioning is pretty powerful, as if familial pressures. I know when I was going to tell my mother I was dating a woman I honestly thought she’d disown me and had to psych myself up for that possibility when I made the call. It was terrifying.
I would certainly have considered myself a feminist as a teenager but I got knocked up at nineteen and fell for the pressure to get married ‘for the child’. That didn’t come from my family but from his who seemed so lively and together that I fell for the lie. While NOW I would be far less likely to succumb to external pressures, that was won BY the times I caved, I had to carve out that independence AFTER my upbringing meant I’d accepted abusive relationships, after I’d married to please, after I’d gone back to care take etc.
And he was a totally self absorbed cunt and I was miserable the whole time and so ground down that the only reason I could muster to leave for was fear for my son’s future. I tried to leave, I packed my bags and made my plans, but was guilted into coming back cos the parents were ‘concerned about what he would do to himself’. Now I’m of the mind that that’s his business, but then…well I did love him in some ways and I didn’t want for him to be hurt. Girls are so strongly conditioned to care for, to fix, to heal, to forgive, to protect and shelter and nurture, and they had me.
Eventually I *did* leave a second time. And he stalked me to the point my hair started falling out, I couldn’t keep weight on and I was an utter nervous wreck. I’m still dealing with the physical and psychological impacts of that stalking.
So while women technically *can* not marry, and *can* leave if they’re unhappy – they’re often in immense danger when they do. That’s the point at which they are most likely in their lives to be harmed or killed. When leaving their husbands.
So I can hear what you’re saying, the *gifting* of girls to men in marriage is not so much an issue, but yeah, I’d be hesitant to say it’s pure and simple choice without taking into account social pressures, the way we raise girls, the financial incentives to marriage and/or cohabitation and then the entanglement of finances and logistic (and this goes both ways, and men stay because they’re supposed to be dependable, and women cos they’re supposed to love and so there are a lot of miserable couples).
Hmm…anyway…it’s all very complicated I think.
Permalink #
Tricky
said
Shit yeah I agree with all that socially conditioning crap and when you are young and naïve it is easy to hope for the best and trust your adult advisors about “the way things should be done”. I had to learn some hard lessons there too. Bloody destructive shit.
Are young girls still heavily influenced by this? My nieces and their friends seem to be very aware of the social manipulation going on with girls and young women. Of course it might help to have a raving lefty aunt. In my limited world, young girls are catching on despite being bludgeoned with pseudofeminist raunch culture. How widespread do you think it still is in 2009?
Your ex sounds like a freakin nightmare.
Have you seen this excellent programme they are running in the UK?
http://www.freedomprogramme.co.uk/freedomprogramme/book.cfm
They are teaching both boys & girls in school and getting good results.
Pat worked for years as a probation officer, and spent two years working on their programme for male perpetrators of violence against women. In addition to learning about the attitudes and behaviours of abusive men, (and changing some of her own) she also came to realize that, “There is a very common misapprehension that a woman who has been abused has some understanding of what has happened to her. This is simply not true. When a woman is being subjected to abuse she feels that she’s in the middle of a very confusing mess and that it must be her fault.”
Pat counteracts the descriptions of the Dominator types with their “good” counterpart, so the reader knows what an emotionally healthy individual looks like. I think this is an important component, since so many women caught up in abusive relationships lose perspective, and lose trust in their own judgment. As Margaret Atwood said in “The Handmaid’s Tale”, “Normal is what you get used to.” Unfortunately, for abused women, “normal” can be pretty fucked up.
In the kids programme they can learn to identify what is good behaviour in a relationship and what is bad. Great things for boys & girls to learn early.
Permalink #
Mountain dew
said
Happy to say I have the same aliens-eye-view of marriage as a strange, rather bizarre custom. Its such an anachronistic institution, and I’ve never ever been able to see myself getting married, and rant about the evils of marriage to anyone who’ll listen…. I actually broach the subject of marriage early on, and any guy who I get conservative, conventional vibes from regarding marriage, gender roles etc, I give the flick!
I even had one guy subtly try to argue that I’d never be able to afford to live in a nice beachside suburb unless I shacked up with a well to do guy (I suppose he meant himself)… and what a lovely prostitution-like arrangement that would have been… blech… anyway, his massive chauvinistic streak came out soon enough, and he and his good 6-figure salary were history… asta la vista jerk.
Permalink #
Rachel Hills
said
Excellent post. I think you’ve really hit the nail on the head of the problem here (is that a mixed metaphor?).
Permalink # The Twelfth Down Under Feminists Carnival « Zero at the Bone said
[…] all come to expect from FP, she writes a response to a Miranda Devine piece on Bettina Arndt in What’s good for the gander…. At Larvatus Prodeo, Kim writes “the conclusions are only as good as the original assumptions”. […]