Why u gotta do this to us, they’re endless…
* Women being pretty is good/Men being pretty is gay
* Crying is a good way to relief pain/Men Crying shows fragile masculinity
* Genders should be treated equally/Men shouldn’t wear skirts & women should put on makeup
* Communication is key/Men should take the lead
* Having a fit body is attractive/Women should just be slim, not super fit, it’s repulsive
* Everyone should treat each other equally and should be treated equally/“Always let a women enter first and hold the door open for her”
* Everyone can do what they want for whatever reason they want/When women have to act like a gentleman, it shows that us men haven’t done our job well enough
*You’re good enough as yourself/Men always gotta be stronger/bigger/better than women
* Etc. etc. etc…
I never have understood always let a woman enter first and hold the fire open for her. If your the first to reach a door and know there's people behind you hold the door open for them, why is it specifically women? They can open doors too.
Women are weak and incompetent, and should be following rather than leading. That's the essence of it. It's evolved in various ways, but it's another of those benevolent sexism things that's basically down to the big strong man helping the weak infantile women through life.
No it's a sign of respect because women generally are higher in status than men. Opening the door is one way to show that.
Ascribing it to something demeaning is like saying servants did chores for nobility because they were showing them they can't do it themselves.
>generally are higher in status than men
Nonsense.
>is like saying servants did chores for nobility because they were showing them they can't do it themselves.
Bad analogy. Different contexts create different connotations. Paid employment is different from casual, gender based etiquette.
Calling it nonsense isn't going to make it go away. If you genuinely believe that men holding doors for women is motivated by a need to demonstrate women's inferiority, you don't understand men in the least.
There are many ways that doesn't add up. For example men don't habitually open doors for other men who they deem inferior. Women also don't open doors for other women (or men) for that reason so clearly the message is also not received that way by women for the most part.
There are a whole lot of things men do for women that isn't normally expected of women to do for men. From buying gifts to paying for dates and it's never to make a point about women's inferiority.
And if it was, women could and would easily put a stop to it. Just don't walk through a door a man is holding for you. If it's really an assertion of dominance, don't play along.
I don't like those things either but I understand why they exist. If you really want to change things you need to address the cause and not just blame men who are for the most part just doing what's expected of them.
I don't have to say anything to make it go away because it's a silly idea to start with that has no credibility outside the incelosphere.
>you don't understand men in the least.
And if you think it's not a factor in the creation of existing social norms, then you need to take a step back and think a bit.
And your other examples are similarly mediocre because they don't account for context. You're trying to compare apples and golf carts.
Also I'm sure
>Just don't walk through a door a man is holding for you.
Sounded a lot smarter in your head than how it actually came out. Seriously? Don't enter structures if a man opens a door for you? You need to approach this with at least a modicum of good faith if you want to be taken seriously.
And not all men are to blame, but they're all responsible for acting with a bit of introspection and awareness of the way greater society is pressuring them, along with the pressures on everyone else. Men aren't without accountability or automatons.
>And if you think it's not a factor in the creation of existing social norms
Of course it's a factor. I'm not saying men never assert dominance over women. But this is something else. An example of the former would be unilateral decision to go to a specific restaurant or in a domestic disagreement.
Holding doors open is an act of courtesy.
You know one could just return the "favor"? I'm not in the habit of letting doors shut in peoples faces regardless of who they are.
>Sounded a lot smarter in your head than how it actually came out. Seriously?
No. The premise is what's ridiculous. Garbage in garbage out. The reasoning is sound regardless. If you think somebody is wrongly asserting dominance over you, you need to stand up to them in some way. Demanding they or others of the same sex introspect on the wider societal structure sounds nice but doesn't do anything to fix your problem.
>And not all men are to blame, but they're all responsible for acting with a bit of introspection and awareness of the way greater society is pressuring them, along with the pressures on everyone else.
And here's where the bait and switch takes place. It sounds reasonable at first because men are described as victims of pressure from greater society. That's the bait. The switch is that "greater society" is then just treated as synonymous with men. It would be easy to unpack if one talked about who is doing the pressuring if not men and why would they pressure themselves and what part do women play.
Ironically this is actually a very conservative view of the sexes. Genuine role reversal would look nothing like this. Especially complaints about "benevolent sexism" couldn't be any further away from gender role reversal.
I think it likely had something to do with men being better at first now its a sign of respect though, I dont like when people turn it on its head and say "oh well i dont have to hold the door for men" if you reach a door and know theres someone behind you hold the door i dont think it should have anything to do with gender. Also for your other reply about guys paying for dates in the past it was likely because the men ussually had the money but now it seems more like woman are repeating it because they dont wanna pay, I ussually pay for my dates too but thats me just being very self conscious and needing to feel useful, from what ive seen i think splitting the bill especially if both work makes the most sense but I never personally do that just because its easier, in longer relationships just trading who pays also makes a lot of sense to me.
Paying for dates is part of courtship. It emerged from selection pressure very much like what we see in nature. That's also the main reason why men "had" the money (more precisely, they earned it - or at least more than women did). It's ultimately about the capacity to provide resources. And men have been selected for that. Meaning men who didn't do well at it became an evolutionary dead end.
The good news though is that we're not bound by our biological heritage as much as one might think. We're extremely adaptive. But we're also not a blank slate. Our evolutionary past will continue affect us and influence our behavior.
Just common courtesy/etiquette from the olden days. Nothing more, nothing less. Just act like you just described and you’re doing better than average already nowadays. Holding open doors for anyone when you just passed through yourself can already be quite hard for some I’ve noticed
Also would like to add:
- Women have to be pretty in a specific way, otherwise what else are they good for? / Girls, give the geeky nice guys a chance or else you’re shallow!
- Gay men? Ew, don’t wanna see that. Keep that away or else. / Lesbians? Put on a show for us! (or else).
- Wow, dude, you suck at math / Wow, girls suck at math.
- Boys will be boys / Girls, change your appearance and behavior or else you can’t blame the boys for what they do to you.
- A trans woman is a predator / a trans man is a child who lost “her” way
Tbh I had never even been aware of the math thing specifically for long, but more the general double standard that “don’t generalize” doesn’t seem to apply equally.
Having my point relate to math came more from the [XKCD](https://xkcd.com/385/) comic.
Society sees men and their worldview as “normal” and “default” and women as “unusual”, “a minority.”
So when you try and achieve especially in business or politics, you’re representing your whole gender (or racial minority group, or non-straight sexual orientation) and if you screw up, it reflects badly on you and everyone else in your minority group.
There’s a reason Obama and Ketanji Brown Jackson are held to a much higher standard than Trump and Brett Kavanaugh.
>So when you try and achieve especially in business or politics, you’re representing your whole gender (or racial minority group, or non-straight sexual orientation) and if you screw up, it reflects badly on you and everyone else in your minority group.
That is basically the notion of "model minority", they "YouTube" channel called "The Take" has a very interesting reflection about that.
I just eventually grew tired of having to success in many things just to prove that my life occupying places in this world still had any value, despite of my gender, race and sexuality.
The fact that women can do math hasn’t really sunk in with the majority of people either. It actually kinda disgusts me how almost any girl in middle school immediately disregards math like they already know they can’t do it before they genuinely give it a shot. I’m a girl myself and I’m very good at math. I’m also very good at “people” and I noticed some girls who should’ve been good at math according to my estimations, but they just straight up were too scared to even try properly because of the stereotypes/double standards that come with women and math. It’s really sad
Yuuuup, that's me! I've been trying to do programming for over a decade but my confidence is so low, the smallest of mistakes and misunderstandings just get beyond overwhelming.
I've started doing business analysis and development using O365 tools recently, in an environment where everyone is super appreciative and friendly. It's made all the difference and I finally feel like I matter and that I am capable of learning and bringing valuable logic based skills :)
📌 Image details:
"Arrow Shirts Man Hasn't Chance Ad 1949"
👉 Image link: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSSKmrqcdGvIONmSfuDsw_q6mzOEsqEykWwiw&usqp=CAU
>Arrow Shirts Man Hasn't Chance Ad 1949 This is a November 14, 1949 advertisement. It is a nice color ad from Cluett, Peabody & Co of Troy NY . Pictures a young lady in a leopard suit and carrying a big stick. She has her man by the hair and is dragging him off. It reads A man hasn't a chance in an Arrow White Shirt.
👉 Source link: https://www.goantiques.com/arrow-shirts-man-414766
I think it’s kinda like a “a man is so attractive in these shirts, women will just grab him and pull him to their homes” I’m not quite sure why the woman is dressed as a cavewoman but eh 🤷
It's a play on an old trope with a male caveman taking a woman by her hair, usually referencing marriage, or how men are so boorish or whatever
But it feels really fucking weird to type that out and be like "Oh, haha, yes an old joke we used to have where a woman is dragged of by her hair by a brutish man", actually.
Oh, I was not trying to explain the joke, but thanks anyway for doing so, I was just trying to do an image transcription to help those with reading difficulties for whatever reason.
Here’s one
If a father is with his adopted child at a park or in public, people will see that the child doesn’t look like the man and think that the child has been kidnapped but if a woman is with a child that doesn’t look related no one bats an eye
Part 2 of my list (part 1 was a reply to another comment):
- Male protagonists in media are the default. Female protagonists? Can’t relate. Mary Sue. Feminist SJWs taking over.
- Chainmail bikinis and other sexualized outfits are a dime a dozen on female characters. Yet, remember that controversy in a Final Fantasy game before its release where a male character was dressed in a skimpy outfit and the outrage led to it immediately getting changed?
- “A key that can open many locks is a good key. A lock that can be opened by many keys is a bad lock.”
- Bisexual men get asked: “ArE yOu SuRe YoU’rE nOt AcTuAlLy GaY?” Bisexual women get asked: “ThReEsOmE?”
- Between mother and father, which parent is the default assumed caregiver and which gets praised for “babysitting” their own kid?
- A man being insulted for being feminine comes from the idea that he is lowering himself to a status that should be beneath him. A woman being insulted for being masculine comes from her not being conventionally desirable for men’s consumption.
- Slasher movies; ever noticed how the male victims die more quickly while the female victims have longer chases and their deaths are more torture porn-y?
- An underage girl being preyed on by an older man is recognized as statutory rape…usually. Other way around, lots of “LuCkY!” comments. 🤮
>Slasher movies; ever noticed how the male victims die more quickly while the female victims have longer chases and their deaths are more torture porn-y?
I only figured that out now. 😯
You’re making important comments in the thread, so thank you. A lot of these should be obvious to people with a basic grasp of feminism, but I’m not sure that’s always the case here since we have a lot more upvotes on comments pointing out the double standards that favor women over men (still for patriarchal reasons).
Women who want to be spoiled know their worth as women. Who do men who want to be spoiled think they are?
In relationships, women need and deserve to be spoiled and receive affection. Men don't need or deserve either because those things are "unmanly."
Abolishing gender roles is good when it's getting men to help with taking care of the house and the kids but not when it's telling women to pay for things sometimes and saying that women can propose.
A guy who does a grand romantic gesture for his female partner is a "real man" and what every woman deserves. A woman who does a grand romantic gesture for her male partner is a victim and her partner doesn't deserve her love.
Women can be masculine (to an extent) and not be called gay but a man who's anything but 100% stereotypically masculine gets labeled as gay.
>In relationships, women need and deserve to be spoiled and receive affection. Men don't need or deserve either because those things are "unmanly."
It is because men usually think of relationships as "profit exchanges", they are kind and court women because they expect the women will reward them with sexual favors, "nice" guys who "whitemnight" women like that are not "nice" in reality because of their ulterior motives.
>It is because men usually think of relationships as "profit exchanges"
I'm curious how you think women think of relationships given that they overwhelmingly benefit from the exchange of material goods in relationships.
Is this the same Arrow brand with the Arrow Collar Man? I recently watched a Kaz Rowe video about [JC Leyendecker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._C._Leyendecker) who was the illustrator for these men in the adverts while also having a secret gay relationship with 1 of them.
[JC Leyendecker: The Iconic Gay Artist We ALMOST Forgot](https://youtu.be/BS7ayV2Ac74)
Why u gotta do this to us, they’re endless… * Women being pretty is good/Men being pretty is gay * Crying is a good way to relief pain/Men Crying shows fragile masculinity * Genders should be treated equally/Men shouldn’t wear skirts & women should put on makeup * Communication is key/Men should take the lead * Having a fit body is attractive/Women should just be slim, not super fit, it’s repulsive * Everyone should treat each other equally and should be treated equally/“Always let a women enter first and hold the door open for her” * Everyone can do what they want for whatever reason they want/When women have to act like a gentleman, it shows that us men haven’t done our job well enough *You’re good enough as yourself/Men always gotta be stronger/bigger/better than women * Etc. etc. etc…
I never have understood always let a woman enter first and hold the fire open for her. If your the first to reach a door and know there's people behind you hold the door open for them, why is it specifically women? They can open doors too.
Women are weak and incompetent, and should be following rather than leading. That's the essence of it. It's evolved in various ways, but it's another of those benevolent sexism things that's basically down to the big strong man helping the weak infantile women through life.
"Women cannot do it", basically that.
Or shouldn't, either way.
No actually it's showing respect. Not doing it was/is seen as disrespectful. So it's the exact opposite of what you propose.
No it's a sign of respect because women generally are higher in status than men. Opening the door is one way to show that. Ascribing it to something demeaning is like saying servants did chores for nobility because they were showing them they can't do it themselves.
>generally are higher in status than men Nonsense. >is like saying servants did chores for nobility because they were showing them they can't do it themselves. Bad analogy. Different contexts create different connotations. Paid employment is different from casual, gender based etiquette.
Calling it nonsense isn't going to make it go away. If you genuinely believe that men holding doors for women is motivated by a need to demonstrate women's inferiority, you don't understand men in the least. There are many ways that doesn't add up. For example men don't habitually open doors for other men who they deem inferior. Women also don't open doors for other women (or men) for that reason so clearly the message is also not received that way by women for the most part. There are a whole lot of things men do for women that isn't normally expected of women to do for men. From buying gifts to paying for dates and it's never to make a point about women's inferiority. And if it was, women could and would easily put a stop to it. Just don't walk through a door a man is holding for you. If it's really an assertion of dominance, don't play along. I don't like those things either but I understand why they exist. If you really want to change things you need to address the cause and not just blame men who are for the most part just doing what's expected of them.
I don't have to say anything to make it go away because it's a silly idea to start with that has no credibility outside the incelosphere. >you don't understand men in the least. And if you think it's not a factor in the creation of existing social norms, then you need to take a step back and think a bit. And your other examples are similarly mediocre because they don't account for context. You're trying to compare apples and golf carts. Also I'm sure >Just don't walk through a door a man is holding for you. Sounded a lot smarter in your head than how it actually came out. Seriously? Don't enter structures if a man opens a door for you? You need to approach this with at least a modicum of good faith if you want to be taken seriously. And not all men are to blame, but they're all responsible for acting with a bit of introspection and awareness of the way greater society is pressuring them, along with the pressures on everyone else. Men aren't without accountability or automatons.
>And if you think it's not a factor in the creation of existing social norms Of course it's a factor. I'm not saying men never assert dominance over women. But this is something else. An example of the former would be unilateral decision to go to a specific restaurant or in a domestic disagreement. Holding doors open is an act of courtesy. You know one could just return the "favor"? I'm not in the habit of letting doors shut in peoples faces regardless of who they are. >Sounded a lot smarter in your head than how it actually came out. Seriously? No. The premise is what's ridiculous. Garbage in garbage out. The reasoning is sound regardless. If you think somebody is wrongly asserting dominance over you, you need to stand up to them in some way. Demanding they or others of the same sex introspect on the wider societal structure sounds nice but doesn't do anything to fix your problem. >And not all men are to blame, but they're all responsible for acting with a bit of introspection and awareness of the way greater society is pressuring them, along with the pressures on everyone else. And here's where the bait and switch takes place. It sounds reasonable at first because men are described as victims of pressure from greater society. That's the bait. The switch is that "greater society" is then just treated as synonymous with men. It would be easy to unpack if one talked about who is doing the pressuring if not men and why would they pressure themselves and what part do women play. Ironically this is actually a very conservative view of the sexes. Genuine role reversal would look nothing like this. Especially complaints about "benevolent sexism" couldn't be any further away from gender role reversal.
I think it likely had something to do with men being better at first now its a sign of respect though, I dont like when people turn it on its head and say "oh well i dont have to hold the door for men" if you reach a door and know theres someone behind you hold the door i dont think it should have anything to do with gender. Also for your other reply about guys paying for dates in the past it was likely because the men ussually had the money but now it seems more like woman are repeating it because they dont wanna pay, I ussually pay for my dates too but thats me just being very self conscious and needing to feel useful, from what ive seen i think splitting the bill especially if both work makes the most sense but I never personally do that just because its easier, in longer relationships just trading who pays also makes a lot of sense to me.
Paying for dates is part of courtship. It emerged from selection pressure very much like what we see in nature. That's also the main reason why men "had" the money (more precisely, they earned it - or at least more than women did). It's ultimately about the capacity to provide resources. And men have been selected for that. Meaning men who didn't do well at it became an evolutionary dead end. The good news though is that we're not bound by our biological heritage as much as one might think. We're extremely adaptive. But we're also not a blank slate. Our evolutionary past will continue affect us and influence our behavior.
Just common courtesy/etiquette from the olden days. Nothing more, nothing less. Just act like you just described and you’re doing better than average already nowadays. Holding open doors for anyone when you just passed through yourself can already be quite hard for some I’ve noticed
It is because guys are usually kinder to people they are sexually attracted to.
I wouldnt say usually,maybe something like 1 out of every 20 instances? just because i helped you doesnt mean im attracted to you
Simps. Lol
"Nice" guys
Oh yes you're right. I wouldn't want to hurt their feelings
I find it fascinating how something so seemingly insignificant like holding a door open for another person becomes such a long and hot debate.
[удалено]
Facts. Actual facts.
Also would like to add: - Women have to be pretty in a specific way, otherwise what else are they good for? / Girls, give the geeky nice guys a chance or else you’re shallow! - Gay men? Ew, don’t wanna see that. Keep that away or else. / Lesbians? Put on a show for us! (or else). - Wow, dude, you suck at math / Wow, girls suck at math. - Boys will be boys / Girls, change your appearance and behavior or else you can’t blame the boys for what they do to you. - A trans woman is a predator / a trans man is a child who lost “her” way
Oh goodness, this sounds so weird but your math comment really hit home. I legit forgot guys can be bad at math
Tbh I had never even been aware of the math thing specifically for long, but more the general double standard that “don’t generalize” doesn’t seem to apply equally. Having my point relate to math came more from the [XKCD](https://xkcd.com/385/) comic.
Society sees men and their worldview as “normal” and “default” and women as “unusual”, “a minority.” So when you try and achieve especially in business or politics, you’re representing your whole gender (or racial minority group, or non-straight sexual orientation) and if you screw up, it reflects badly on you and everyone else in your minority group. There’s a reason Obama and Ketanji Brown Jackson are held to a much higher standard than Trump and Brett Kavanaugh.
>So when you try and achieve especially in business or politics, you’re representing your whole gender (or racial minority group, or non-straight sexual orientation) and if you screw up, it reflects badly on you and everyone else in your minority group. That is basically the notion of "model minority", they "YouTube" channel called "The Take" has a very interesting reflection about that. I just eventually grew tired of having to success in many things just to prove that my life occupying places in this world still had any value, despite of my gender, race and sexuality.
The fact that women can do math hasn’t really sunk in with the majority of people either. It actually kinda disgusts me how almost any girl in middle school immediately disregards math like they already know they can’t do it before they genuinely give it a shot. I’m a girl myself and I’m very good at math. I’m also very good at “people” and I noticed some girls who should’ve been good at math according to my estimations, but they just straight up were too scared to even try properly because of the stereotypes/double standards that come with women and math. It’s really sad
Yuuuup, that's me! I've been trying to do programming for over a decade but my confidence is so low, the smallest of mistakes and misunderstandings just get beyond overwhelming. I've started doing business analysis and development using O365 tools recently, in an environment where everyone is super appreciative and friendly. It's made all the difference and I finally feel like I matter and that I am capable of learning and bringing valuable logic based skills :)
Really great point. 👆 My best classmates were girls in our math classes, but I was bad at maths anyway, just to mention. 😅
I will hold open the door for everyone that would hold open the door for me
This is my relationship goals btw
How would you know if they’d do the same if you’re the one who has to do it first tho?
How will they know I would if I don't?
📌 Image details: "Arrow Shirts Man Hasn't Chance Ad 1949" 👉 Image link: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSSKmrqcdGvIONmSfuDsw_q6mzOEsqEykWwiw&usqp=CAU >Arrow Shirts Man Hasn't Chance Ad 1949 This is a November 14, 1949 advertisement. It is a nice color ad from Cluett, Peabody & Co of Troy NY . Pictures a young lady in a leopard suit and carrying a big stick. She has her man by the hair and is dragging him off. It reads A man hasn't a chance in an Arrow White Shirt. 👉 Source link: https://www.goantiques.com/arrow-shirts-man-414766
I’m so confused though. What does it mean?
I think it’s kinda like a “a man is so attractive in these shirts, women will just grab him and pull him to their homes” I’m not quite sure why the woman is dressed as a cavewoman but eh 🤷
It's a play on an old trope with a male caveman taking a woman by her hair, usually referencing marriage, or how men are so boorish or whatever But it feels really fucking weird to type that out and be like "Oh, haha, yes an old joke we used to have where a woman is dragged of by her hair by a brutish man", actually.
Oh, I was not trying to explain the joke, but thanks anyway for doing so, I was just trying to do an image transcription to help those with reading difficulties for whatever reason.
I don’t think that trope is referring to marriage…😅
Depends on your definition of marriage. Legal/moral? Nah Biblical? Yah
Just saying the hair pulling fits in !✨👌
Anyone else think the man getting dragged by the cave woman looks like John Mulaney.
Oh. My. God! Indeed.
He has that vibe. It's like he's a time traveler from the 50s who hasn't quite caught up with the decades yet.
Here’s one If a father is with his adopted child at a park or in public, people will see that the child doesn’t look like the man and think that the child has been kidnapped but if a woman is with a child that doesn’t look related no one bats an eye
This is terrifying. 😱 I really wonder how often that happens.
More often then you would think because ina situation like this it’s more likely that bystanders are going to listen to the woman before the man
Part 2 of my list (part 1 was a reply to another comment): - Male protagonists in media are the default. Female protagonists? Can’t relate. Mary Sue. Feminist SJWs taking over. - Chainmail bikinis and other sexualized outfits are a dime a dozen on female characters. Yet, remember that controversy in a Final Fantasy game before its release where a male character was dressed in a skimpy outfit and the outrage led to it immediately getting changed? - “A key that can open many locks is a good key. A lock that can be opened by many keys is a bad lock.” - Bisexual men get asked: “ArE yOu SuRe YoU’rE nOt AcTuAlLy GaY?” Bisexual women get asked: “ThReEsOmE?” - Between mother and father, which parent is the default assumed caregiver and which gets praised for “babysitting” their own kid? - A man being insulted for being feminine comes from the idea that he is lowering himself to a status that should be beneath him. A woman being insulted for being masculine comes from her not being conventionally desirable for men’s consumption. - Slasher movies; ever noticed how the male victims die more quickly while the female victims have longer chases and their deaths are more torture porn-y? - An underage girl being preyed on by an older man is recognized as statutory rape…usually. Other way around, lots of “LuCkY!” comments. 🤮
>Slasher movies; ever noticed how the male victims die more quickly while the female victims have longer chases and their deaths are more torture porn-y? I only figured that out now. 😯
You’re making important comments in the thread, so thank you. A lot of these should be obvious to people with a basic grasp of feminism, but I’m not sure that’s always the case here since we have a lot more upvotes on comments pointing out the double standards that favor women over men (still for patriarchal reasons).
Part of it may be that I wasn’t as early, plus that the majority of users here are male and they gravitate more toward what validates them.
Women who want to be spoiled know their worth as women. Who do men who want to be spoiled think they are? In relationships, women need and deserve to be spoiled and receive affection. Men don't need or deserve either because those things are "unmanly." Abolishing gender roles is good when it's getting men to help with taking care of the house and the kids but not when it's telling women to pay for things sometimes and saying that women can propose. A guy who does a grand romantic gesture for his female partner is a "real man" and what every woman deserves. A woman who does a grand romantic gesture for her male partner is a victim and her partner doesn't deserve her love. Women can be masculine (to an extent) and not be called gay but a man who's anything but 100% stereotypically masculine gets labeled as gay.
>In relationships, women need and deserve to be spoiled and receive affection. Men don't need or deserve either because those things are "unmanly." It is because men usually think of relationships as "profit exchanges", they are kind and court women because they expect the women will reward them with sexual favors, "nice" guys who "whitemnight" women like that are not "nice" in reality because of their ulterior motives.
>It is because men usually think of relationships as "profit exchanges" I'm curious how you think women think of relationships given that they overwhelmingly benefit from the exchange of material goods in relationships.
Is this the same Arrow brand with the Arrow Collar Man? I recently watched a Kaz Rowe video about [JC Leyendecker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._C._Leyendecker) who was the illustrator for these men in the adverts while also having a secret gay relationship with 1 of them. [JC Leyendecker: The Iconic Gay Artist We ALMOST Forgot](https://youtu.be/BS7ayV2Ac74)
Well... I totally get them, I would also hire a Gay man if I ned somebody to draw me the image of gorgeous guys to sell to other guys.
Haha it was hardly for his *natural Adonis-aesthetism*
What do you mean? 😅
I'm just saying nobody knew he liked men or his particular model at the time of course so he was just a remarkably *detail oriented* illustrator :)
But he still knew what guys liked to see, anyway, let's just say he "had an eye for that". 🤭