Do you know if they will be excluded from alumne events? (Assuming the frat has those... I live in a fratless country, so I'm not in the loop)

I should think that all feminists have "an agenda".

As an ideal, yes. But as a behavior, hardly. I imagine that anyone yearning to bring back "the code" thinks that it would improve behavior and there is simply less than no evidence of that being the case. Women weren't respected or treated well, code or no code. And even as an ideal, it's pretty shitty.

Oh my bad, I must have been misled by "I don't like people who have lots of sexual partners".

But but but... If people don't advertise their many many sexual partners, how will you know not to like them?

We don't need sexism to protect us, we need respect so the need for protection from men who have objectified us to the extent that they feel free to perpetrate sexual violonce against us becomes obsolete. And benevolent sexism doesn't protect us. The people who endorse benevolent sexism, while they may not be violent…

The fact that he is perpetrating one form of sexist behavior (hostile sexism) does not make the solution another form of sexism (benevolent sexism). Benevolent sexism is damaging and based on a fault essenialist basis. It is not the solution. The solution is respect, and doing away with sexism. Benevolent sexism, when…

Of course a man should not be ashamed to propose, but he should be ashamed if he thinks it inappropriate or emasculating if a woman proposed. And a woman shouldn't be ashamed to accept a proposal, but nor should she feel obligated to wait for her partner to propose.

I'm not saying it isn't benevolent sexism, because of course it is, I'm sayin that benevolent sexism is a bad thing with dangerous repercussions and which should not be encouraged. I want respect not benevolence. And incidentally all the aspects of modern "chivalry" that you list, are things that I oppose.

But chivalry doesn't extend any respect towards women whatsoever. It includes an ideal of manners which is only extended to women out of respect for their male owners or potential owners. It's not respect, it's just an extension of laws against property-defacement so they cover a man's woman as well as his car.

Thank you, and good point about chivalry having existed, but as an ideal. I would definitely prefer to be respected as an equal, rather than as a piece of property that should be kept clean and faultless for my owner/husband. And regarding the protecting of women's virtue, we should keep in mind that this of course…

Hey it's like that skit Ellen does of celebrities dancing behind people's backs, except with some guy I've never heard of and instead of dancing, he's simulating rape. I lol'd. Just kidding, I didn't watch the video because I don't want to give him hits.

TL;DR Chivalry never existed, so we can't bring it back.

Chivalry is based on honor and loyalty to God and the King. Women were protected because our "virtue" was important to God (in stories, not in real life, in real life we were sold in marriage and raped). Chivalry is based on Christianity and women as tempting and fragile objects. Chivalry is also not extended to…

And add to that the fact that the guy holding her at gunpoint, her husband, lived with her children. Who would resist knowing that the guy who might just kill you for doing so would be going home to your children afterwards? He had already shot at and threatened to kill her daughter if Mary went to the police.

I don't think it's trolling. I think it's just very inconsistent relativism.

The thing I don't get about cultural relativism is its tendency to believe that cultures are somehow absolute structures, when they (like language) are fluid, as has been pointed out. How much culture do people have to share to be allowed to get involved? Surely, India doesn't share a culture with Nepal. Are Indian…

I didn't check the dates, I just wanted to see if you were trolling. Besides, your "let's bomb Syria" post is only half a year old. Did you become a cultural relativist very recently?

I'm confused. How can you be a moral and cultural relativist, but also be against abortion and think the US should bomb Syria? That doesn't compute...

I imagine Diva Cups and similar products would be problematic because of limited access to clean water. Disposable hygene products (though less cost-efficient and nature-friendly) are probably the way to go for now.