There’s no pleasing some people, is there?

A new book has re-ignited a fraught debate in France over whether gallantry is a “brilliant but poisonous myth” that must be jettisoned a year after #Metoo or a treasured Gallic exception that is the envy of the world.

Gallantry, which first appeared in France in the mid-17th century as a code of conduct between the sexes in high society and an art form, may have provided subservient women with a modicum of empowerment at the time but its legacy is perpetuating gender inequality.

That is the view of Laure Murat, a French professor at the University of California in Los Angeles in her A Sexual Revolution, Post-Weinstein Reflections, written in response to the rape scandal involving Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein on both sides of the Atlantic.

Ms Murat described the concept of gallantry as a “screen” that has helped keep sexual relations partially in the dark ages in France by stopping people thinking about “what seduction is exactly”.

It continues to be viewed by many, she said, as a central part of French art de vivre based on “asymmetric consent, namely that the man proposes, the woman disposes.”

The central point being that it is women who have that decision making power. This oppresses women, does it?

28 thoughts on “There’s no pleasing some people, is there?”

  1. “rape scandal”? How many rapes has he been convicted of?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45828023?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cmnz4k61vmmt/harvey-weinstein-charges&link_location=live-reporting-story

    One case dismissed, judge talking about perjury. Ho hum.

    I’ve no doubt actresses prostituted themselves to get the role they wanted, and that he is/was a dirty old bastard who used his power this way. But to say this ‘forced’ women to have sex with him is absurd.

    Absurd? Oh wait, it’s 2018.

  2. Nowadays, it’s enough to be angry.

    Since we are all socialists now, it’s perfectly acceptable to hold two completely differing views, as long as they express anger at the persons you dislike.

    If I offer to help a young mother with two children off the train and onto the escalator, I’m a vile, arrogant member of the patriarchy trying to humiliate a woman. If I ignore her, I’m a vile, uncaring bastard.

    I’m vile either way, which is just fine with the feminista.

  3. So, some fat, Jewish guy in Hollywood allegedly abuses some women and it’s the fault of the French?

    The state of modern scholarship.

  4. CM scum alert!

    ‘perpetuating gender inequality’

    Not sexual inequality, but gender inequality. Thus revealing they don’t give a shit about women, either.

  5. So, some fat, Jewish guy in Hollywood allegedly abuses some women and it’s the fault of the French?

    Maybe they invented the ficus, or something.

    It’s a common theme in feminist “scholarship” anyway: it’s not just that Jimmy Savile, Harvey Weinstein, or Bill Clinton were bad men, it’s that the Heteropatriarchal Cis-priviliged Western Capitalist Rape Culture* – which you need special Wymyn’s Studies glasses to see – made them do it, somehow. Probably with all those pro-rape messages cunningly disguised as heterosexual attraction.

    (*Does not apply to actual rape cultures such as Islam, bigots.)

    In other news, senior anti-sex league member Mme Murat looks like this:

    https://www.timeshighereducation.com/sites/default/files/styles/the_breaking_news_image_style/public/Pictures/web/z/n/a/Muratauthor.jpg?itok=EXes8bTl

    If she’s not getting any, nobody’s getting any.

  6. Bloke in North Dorset

    Steve,

    I’m suing you or not providing a trigger warning, that link was horrifying and I now need to find a safe space.

  7. @pjf – a woman pretending to be a man, pretends to be a dog . What confuses me is that this freak is married to a man. I presume therefore the icing on the cake is that this woman pretending to be a man, who pretends to be a dog is also gay, or have i lost the thread somewhere. Time for some PTS

  8. I remember the days when insane, continual screaming at people for 30 minutes wasn’t something people were publicly proud of.

    Anyway, doesn’t that count as domestic abuse?

  9. The point the *ahem* professor misses, and Tim doesn’t is that women ( of sufficient social standing.. no-one cared about the hoi-polloi, including the male portion of that social stratum..) up to the, roughly, mid-18thC *did* have power, and gobs of it.

    They had their own network, which was much more fluid and flexible than the highly stratified social circle of the males, and could and would decide on patronage, suitability of marriages, fosterings, and all other kinds of “minor” alliances and associations which could make or break your fortune.

    It pays to be *nice* to people with that kind of power, especially when they can accomplish what you, as a male, could not possibly manage due to social constraints.

    Good chance the dear professor is actually jealous of those poor, oppressed, historical women. They had, after all, far more social clout than she ever will.

  10. Jonathan,
    Maybe the French are feeling guilty about a lot of the accusations being based around the Canne film festival. I imagine the Italians would be more relaxed about such power dynamics (based upon my recent observations in The Costa Esmeralda).

  11. I wonder if any of the French feminazis who witter on about toxic masculinity and how appalling chivalry is have ever heard of Lt.Col Arnaud Beltrame. There is at least one woman in France alive today because of this man (who is himself now dead).

  12. “That is the view of Laure Murat, a French professor at the University of California in Los Angeles in her A Sexual Revolution, Post-Weinstein Reflections, written in response to the rape scandal involving Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein”

    Sorry, I’ll translate that last bit;

    “…written in an attempt to cash in and jump on the band wagon created by the (alleged) rape scandal involving Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein”

  13. “That would just be terrible.”

    “I certainly hope not, Mr Ecks.”

    It’s very nice of you both to care!

    I went away for a week. I’m back now.

  14. As the great 19th century philosopher Unknown said, “You can’t build yourself up by tearing someone else down.”

    The Marxists never got the message.

    Ms Murat, et al, think tearing men down is to build women up. In reality, it diminishes women. It is the “toxic feminism” that Paglia describes.

  15. “You can’t build yourself up by tearing someone else down.”

    And you’d never think of tearing anyone down yourselves, right?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *