“‘The Bachelor’ Is Sexist”

A few years back I was LTR’d with a particularly stimulation-seeking, short-term-oriented woman. This plus her relatively socon upbringing meant that she had a straightline blue-pill perspective of female pedestalization and lack of coherent logic in her thinking. She lived in a rapidly-swirling, “how can I make myself feel good right now” emotional swamp. I used to tease her by reading aloud Roissy’s more incendiary invectives.

One day I made a crack about the girls on The Bachelor*, how pathetically desperate they were to earn the attentions of the show’s synthetically-famous protagonist. I can’t say I was prepared for her reply.

“That show is sexist.”

“What?” I could think of a lot of negative adjectives to describe the program, but sexist wasn’t one of them.

“It’s wrong to force girls to chase a guy around on TV. Women shouldn’t compete for a man.”

I hadn’t seen any evidence anybody was being “forced” to participate in the show. Even knowing her troubles with agency for over a year, the victimhood mentality surprised me. Sure the show is contrived, but the basic outline of women chasing and competing for a very attractive and high-status man plays out everywhere without lights, cameras or professional makeup. But to her, merely the sight of a guy entertaining offers from multiple girls was evidence of social violence and wrong, apparently under the idea that it’s unfair to cause a woman negative feelings by suggesting she can’t have the man she wants – or the old primary-school rule, “if you bring a snack you have to bring one for everybody.”

I then made a grave, yet revelatory, error in trying to appeal to logic and fairness.

“What about “The Bachelorette”? Isn’t that the same thing but sexist against guys?”

Her reply was quick and resolute.

“No – men are supposed to compete for a woman, so that’s OK.”

This one-minute conversation was a verbal lithograph of a Rollo Tomassi-esque plugged-in worldview – a female-presumptive narrative where woman is always higher value, no ifs, ands or butts about it, and man by virtue of his being is called upon to continuously re-prove his worth.

What’s sad (and dangerous for their own well-being) is that men believe this stuff too.

*(It’s interesting to note that trash TV was part of our undoing. I would usually sit on the couch with her and steadfastly read a book or blog while she watched whatever chick-porn struck her fancy. In an argument once, she revealed that she found it profoundly insulting that I wasn’t focused on whatever brain-killing junk culture she was focused on. I guess she felt judged…guilty as charged.)

About these ads

23 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

23 responses to ““‘The Bachelor’ Is Sexist”

  1. taterearl

    “In an argument once, she revealed that she found it profoundly insulting that I wasn’t focused on whatever brain-killing junk culture she was focused on. ”

    Solipsism must also imply that everything they do and watch is interesting…therefore you must find it interesting. 90% of it is garbage and serves no purpose to anything.

    I hope you didn’t get sucked into an hour long fight with this lady…I would have just said…”well I don’t” and leave it at that.

  2. greenlander

    Arguing with chicks is pointless. Their hamsters are just too strong.

    If you want to have a logical conversation, save it for your guy friends.

    When you’re with your chick, just have fun with her and don’t take anything she says too seriously. You’ll both be happier that way.

  3. I hadn’t ever thought of looking at reality TV under a red pill frame. I’d rather be reading the news or a book like you – but it’s probably a good indication of how much power the female point of view has over society. Men would never watch that emotional garbage.

    Takes some special hamsterbatics to call it sexist though. Especially when I bet she’d be right there competing with them if given the chance.

  4. Spoos in August

    Anything a woman doesn’t like is sexist; I got called a sexist for telling a relative she had more clothes than I do.

    And, yeah, avoid reality TV. My introduction to the Manosphere was linksurfing while the (ex) girlfriend watched “Say Yes to the Dress” and “Top Model.”

  5. Anonymous

    Hey Badger – Are you still checking the email listed on your About page? Sent an email a couple weeks ago and you’re usually awesome about answers.

  6. BC

    For curiosity’s sake, how long after that did the LTR last, and what was the final eye-opening straw that broke its back?

  7. M3

    Chicks love drama. They love to ‘babble’ about pointless shit. It’s talk for the sake of talk, no resolutions. It allows them to revel in manufactured feelings and emotions.

    And when you’ve been taught that you’re a princess your whole life and deserve the best men to fight over you, the idea for them having to compete for men would be as unfathomable to them in much the same way the bloodthirsty crowds would never expect to have to entertain a Colosseum full of gladiators in the stands, by have to fight lions barehanded.

    Probably can be classified under male privilege or some shit.

  8. Pingback: “‘The Bachelor’ Is Sexist” « PUA Central

  9. Vicomte

    How in God’s name were you able to read with Jersey Shore dialed to 11 in the background?

    Teach me your dark secrets.

  10. Dale

    The “Bachelorette” is a beautiful example of blue pill manhood.

  11. Anonymous Reader

    Thanks for that illustration, Badger. It’s like the 1 minute instant microwave example of the feminine imperative. Push button …. ding! There it is, hot and fresh.

    “Sexist”, like “Fascist” has become a word with essentially no meaning beyond “I dislike” and “I wish to silence”. Orwell said this truth about “Fascist” a couple of generations ago far better than that but I’m on a slow link and too lazy to look up the quote in a book.

  12. @badger
    “she watched whatever chick-porn struck her fancy. In an argument once, she revealed that she found it profoundly insulting that I wasn’t focused on whatever brain-killing junk culture she was focused on.”

    Clearly, you aren’t an idiot. In the last several years, it has struck me profoundly how people will literally pay money for the right to digest “entertainment” that is so terribly insulting to their intelligence, not matter how limited.

    As for chick-porn, it drives me virtually insane when I consider the church’s quick condemnation for man-porn, but laissez-faire approach to materials toxic to a woman’s sense of reality.

  13. “Chicks love drama. They love to ‘babble’ about pointless shit. It’s talk for the sake of talk, no resolutions. It allows them to revel in manufactured feelings and emotions.”

    Which is why you should never cave into their feelings or emotions. The only time it matters is if she becomes indifferent…or life threatening psycho to you. Then it’s time to leave.

  14. “Sexist” has entered the polite lexicon as a bad word, just like “racist”, when in fact the functional acknowledging of differences (aka “discriminating”) is in many situations the hallmark of a well-functioning society. If a society goes completely blank-slate, it can’t arbitrage the strengths against the weaknesses of its members in order to optimize productivity and other things. Comparative advantage is why economic trade works, and it seems reasonable to reduce the contributions of different members (individuals particularly, groups generally) of society to economic components. Once you do that, you may be “racist”, “sexist”, “age-ist”, “cognitive-ist”, “elitist”, or any number of other -isms, but you’ll probably be able to better function as a whole body politic.

    Currently, though, those labels have been associated more with the irrational dislike-based slanders groups versus the well-founded acknowledgements of comparative differences.

    File also under: most stereotypes have some basis in fact.

  15. The only times I care about a woman’s intelligence is regarding bullshit like this.

    Thousands of things wrong with them, but at least college-educated coathanger feminists (at least the one in my ultra-liberal town) dutifully reject bullshit shows like this. Feminism FTW :P

  16. Infantry

    Badger, I’m an INTP. I really like reading how you deconstruct interactions.

    You’re spot on.

  17. Georgia Boy

    Reveling in manufactured feelings and emotions pretty much describes their scropted shows too, ever watched Gray’s Anatomy? Every time it’s on while I’m in the room, somebody on the show is having an emotional meltdown over something. Every. F’ing. Time.

    Fortunately the women I know don’t take it too seriously, so I just chalk it up to guilty pleasures. I’ve got mine too.

    The Bachelor/Bachlorette is the most awful though, the worst example out there on major network TV. My personal choice for runner up is Private Practice.

  18. Georgia Boy

    “Sexist”, like “Fascist” has become a word with essentially no meaning beyond “I dislike” and “I wish to silence”. Orwell said this truth about “Fascist” a couple of generations ago far better than that but I’m on a slow link and too lazy to look up the quote in a book.

    That’s the word “creepy” in a nutshell. A dog whistle to the other women present, said about a man, meaning not much other than I want us to gang up and shame him. I’ve heard it used for things like him coming in and sitting in the seat right next to her in the library.

  19. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2012/11/28 « Free Northerner

  20. Miceala

    If this woman was so intellectually inferior to you, why did you go out with her…?

  21. Pingback: “You Can’t Judge Her For Her Dream” | The Badger Hut

  22. Micaela,

    She wasn’t intellectually inferior. She just couldn’t think straight when the topic was the sexual marketplace – all of her logic and rhetoric converged on her pre-conceived conclusion that women were higher value than men and any portrayal to the contrary was offensive to her entire gender. She was smart, but one of her key flaws was that she wasn’t really interested in living an intellectual life; seeking sensual stimulation was more of her thing, and far less of mine, at least less enough to make it a long-term compatibility problem.

    However, your comment does bring up another good point. Let me turn your argument into a syllogism: if a woman was intellectually weak, and I invested in dating her, then I made a bad dating decision. IOW, it should be a standing aim to mate at my intellectual level (whatever that may be – I make no claims on my own cognitive prowess that you can’t read in my posts).

    Somehow “intellectual equality” has been raised into some kind of holy immutable relationship requirement.

    I happen to enjoy dating intellectually active women (see above), but I know men who have placed that below other relationship requirements including mutual attraction and combined life purpose.

    I have dated some women who were “nexted” for a lack of brainpower or an inability to think straight and make good judgments. For some of these guys, that wouldn’t have made much of a difference.
    But in other cases, these men have given up on angling for “the total package” – some of my more intelligent male friends are quite disappointed by the statistical fact that as unusually smart men, there is by definition a very small pool of people who can give them the cranial stimulation they crave, and so their mating prospects are quite limited if they are holding out for for that in a partner.

    I think the most lucid thing I’ve heard from one of those guys is that of all the things a relationship can give him, intellectual exchange is the most replaceable – he can get that from friends, relatives, coworkers or on the Internet, none of which can offer him affection, comfort and love.

    Needless to say, these men have been accused of various nefarious aims or of not properly appreciating intellect in a woman. College-educated women in particular tend to bristle at hearing a man say that other things are more important to his romantic choices, defaulting to shaming language about guys trying to pick up on “dumb, submissive, easily-impressed” girls.

    Again going back to my girlfriend’s ego-protecting thought process, there’s a certain degree of marketplace protection going on, of women trying to create a submarket in which their particular traits are advantageous, to “stack the deck” in the race to grab top men.

    A curious analogy you could make is to height. Tall girls curse short girls who date tall men, because a short girl who could date any man asymmetrically takes away a tall guy from the tall girl’s pool. Likewise I’ve heard “smart girls” curse “dumb girls” from taking a smart man off the market, as discussed above.

    And then it becomes clear – it’s a hypergamy thing, he needs to be better than her in her eyes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s