Dissidents Philosophy Forum

Internet Philosophical Community
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Chivalrous non-sense.

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
The Fool
Administrator
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 368
Age : 30
Location : United States Midwest
Registration date : 2008-12-12

PostSubject: Chivalrous non-sense.   Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:01 pm

What is chivalry? It is courtly love. It is romantic fiction.

More importantly it is idolization. Idolization of whom? Idolization of women.

The man (idolizer) accepts the independence of his mistress and tries to make himself worthy of her by acting bravely and honorably ( by that of moral fictitious judgements ) and by doing whatever deeds she might desire as to gain her affection through various forms of servitude. ( as a lackey or servant.)

This sort of idealization of the sexes was made popular through medeival times but more importantly has become common place in the modern century by feminism.

The man who is the idolizer is a immasculated man in that he is absent from being assertive,dominant, or independent on his own but instead becomes a slave to the woman through various deeds and services for her as she holds within herself his need to procreate all the while she gets him to idolize her at the same time.

Historically chivalry,courtly love, and the romantic movement have described women as an ennoble, spiritual, and moral force which even further enhances the idolization.

If we take this into context it sounds alot like the feminist meta narrative of women historically being ennoble or innocent as spiritual beings amongst a destructively oppressive patriarchy that oppresses them.

But more important the power in which women and feminism asserts itself is one of idolization where the redefinition of men's social roles ( a emasculative one.) is one where men serve women under various tasks, services,deeds, and acts in that women expect everything out of men but where men are tied to their fingers by idolization in being a slave to their sexual desires which only a woman can relieve but more importantly this nonsense emphasizes that men are to expect nothing for themselves beyond that which only women can give them making the masses of idolizing men all the more eager to be woman's chivalrous puppets.

Amongst a modern world of populist culture, magazines, televised theatrics, and animated idolatry the idolization of women under these guises are further enhanced leaving room for men's emasculation to be even greater.

This sort of paradigm of the sexes is very interesting in that through this context women expect out of men to do various deeds, acts, services, and gestures in order to gain their affections but when it comes to masculinism of men women are expected to do nothing where in the opposite direction women make no iniative to do anything in comparison to gain the affections of men.

Here in this context the man is a constant laboring servant for women where in comparison women make no labors for men.

Perhaps the medeival articulation of women being ennoble, spiritual, or moral is just a ruse to get men to be at their forver beckoning call in that it's all just mere subterfuge.

Isn't it ironic that women expect everything out of men but at the same time women expect to do nothing when it comes to servicing men? Laughing

Sure women have sex with men but other than that women use it as a way of controlling and manipulating men in that they have no other gifts to do so. ( That is they'll have sex with a man if he goes through a rigorous line of tasks that serves her by proving his chivalrous submission.)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net
 
Chivalrous non-sense.
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» The Sixth Sense.
» Depopulation of the Masses Has Begun - Dave Hodges, The Common Sense Show
» DIATRIBE: MAKING SENSE OF DIABETES
» Do you ever get an overwhelming sense of burden for the church
» Maliki: decentralization may lead to a sense secede Monday, February 27, 2012 15:07

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Dissidents Philosophy Forum :: Sociology-
Jump to: