 |
| This has nothing to do with the post, I just thought it was funny |
This broken communication is highlighted by the tragic UCSB shooting that happened yesterday due to the hand of Elliot Roger, a seriously ego-centric dude on a major God complex and with some influence by the Men's Rights movement. (If you want to read up on how he was influenced by the Men's Rights movement in detail, click here) In his video manifesto, he basically stated that he had no clue why females and popular people as a whole weren't paying attention to him. All he wanted was "adoration" by women and was brutally denied of sex, pleasures and love. Therefore, he was going to go to a sorority house on campus and shoot all the "blonde sluts." You'll just have to watch the video to believe it. It's disgusting.
Facebook automatically blew up with anger. A lot of girls, including myself, couldn't even comprehend this guy's entitlement mentality. He felt that he deserved sex and adoration, and he didn't get it. He, in "retribution," would kill a bunch of girls because "it wasn't fair" that he was a 22 year old that had never been kissed. He granted himself the license to kill because he was no one was paying attention to him, the "supreme gentleman" and "alpha male," while all of the girls threw themselves at other "obnoxious" guys.
But, in reaction to the girls' reaction, the guys blew up a bit too. The guys, in short, stated that it was wrong to drag feminism into a tragedy where people died, and this crime wasn't due to his attitude towards women, but it was his very unstable mental state. Some guys even stated that, by speaking out, the feminists were lumping all men into Men's Rights believers and enablers, even if they were just disagreeing.
So, I feel obligated to clear some of the water between the guys and girls because I was one of those girls that posted on Facebook about this. I can't speak for all girls out there, but I think a lot of them would agree with me. In my opinion, there were a buttload of things that made this guy do what he did, one of them being that he felt that he deserved sex and love from women. I also think that this guy was unstable as hell and had really, really deep-seeded insecurities. So the Men's Rights influence wasn't the sole factor for this, but it was a factor that shouldn't be minimized.
I also think that last month's stabbing of that girl who declined a prom offer by the dude who asked her shows a disturbing start of a trend. I won't call it a full-blown trend because the Prom thing and the UCSB thing is only 2 instances, but I hope to God something like this never happens again. But in these two instances, the girl's "no" was not respected. In both of these situations, the guys acted violently to rejection rather than taking it and moving on. It's very troubling to see that, in these two instances, a girl's "no" was lethal. And I understand that plucking up the courage to approach a girl is hard, and getting rejected is even harder, but that rejection gives the guy no right to act violently. I've been in the guy's shoes too: I asked this guy to Winter Formal this year and he declined. I didn't react violently, nor did I make his life hell afterwards. I just took the hit and moved on. I respected his right to decline my offer, and I didn't feel entitled to a yes.
And when girls are speaking out against a guy's rather horrid actions, we are not clumping ALL guys into this particular guy's category. Let me repeat that: We are not clumping ALL guys into this particular guy's category. This goes for Elliot Roger, this goes for the crazy prom guy, this goes for those disgusting guys who catcall girls and harass them verbally from the sidewalk. WE DON'T MEAN TO CLUMP. WE REALLY DON'T. There are some really great guys out there. We are not men haters. Most guys are normal and nice and totally with it. If you're reading this right now, you're probably one of the good ones. We like guys. We especially like you nice guys in a nice suit. So, please, don't take it personally because it's not personal at all.
So what the hell do girls want? They want to be on equal footing with men, and yet, they want guys to be chivalrous and treat them like princesses? (the princess thing only goes for some girls, I'm not really one of them) They want nice guys, but a nice guy comes along, and they friendzone him. They flirt with guys, they string them along, they make them pay for food and presents and what the hell?! And dude, I empathize with you. Truth of the matter is, girls really don't know what they are feeling 75% of the time, or at least, that's what I'm like. You feel that girls are demanding more from you and giving you less of what you want in return. And I get that, I recognize your frustration. We are pretty damn confusing, so lemme try to clear some stuff up.
The modern woman wants to be respected. The reason why we really hate hearing "get back in the kitchen," and "go make me a sandwich" is because they are commands. No girl, or human being for that matter, likes to be told what to do or be backed into a corner. Does that mean we will never make you a sandwich? NO. I will gladly make you a sandwich if you ask nicely and are respectful. You make me a sandwich in return? You get bonus points. If I really don't want to make you a sandwich because x, y, and z? You can make your own sandwich, and I will make my own as well. Simple as that. We can both make dinner together, or we can switch off, or we can just order takeout (ugh, yum). It's a balance. We are not your subordinates, we don't want to be ballbreakers either. We just want to be your equals. I don't know about other girls, but I hold doors open for guys when I get to the door first, because it's common courtesy. So if you hold a door open for me, I will say "thanks" and be happy that you did, and maybe will hold the door for you sometime in the future.
But at the same time, don't get carried away with "common courtesy" concept. Just because you are nice to a girl, does not mean she owes you anything emotionally or sexually. Just because you give her a great first, second, or third date doesn't mean she owes you sex. Sex is not like making sandwiches for each other or holding doors, it's not a matter of common courtesy. Stuff like that is really personal, and the girl shouldn't feel obligated to give it to you. If she's diggin' you and she's feelin' it, she'll probably let you know. Let that choice be hers, like that choice is for you.
And there is a difference between being nice and friendly and being flirty. Some girls are just natural flirts and her "friendly" might be easily confused with "flirty." That's just humans though - I'm sure guys do the same thing sometimes. If you get a hunch that a girl likes you, but doesn't and wants to remain friends, she shouldn't be punished for that because GUYS DO THE EXACT SAME THING. Girls are friendzoned too - I've been friendzoned! It sucks but you get over it. It's a different story when a girl purposely flirts with a guy to lead him on or have him buy things for her or any other ridiculous thing like that - that's not respectful nor is it right.
The world is different than it was in the '50s. I'd make a horrible housewife, I really would. I'd just get bored and I'm no chef either. But my point is - girls just want to be respected as men's equals. I'm sure the Men's Rights movement just wants respect too. I think both the Feminists and the Men's Rights guys have super extreme wings - but I think that most girls today who like the Feminist movement just want respect and equality, and guys really don't feel like being a girl's servant at her every beck and call. Both guys and girls have desires, wants, and needs, but it's all a give-and-take, two-way-street thing. If we both just understand that, maybe the UCSB tragedy would have never occurred.
And if you read this whole thing, thanks! You deserve a medal. And I spoke kind of candidly too, so if it was weird, sorry. k bye.
