High Maintenance
Attention, amorous menfolk. The rules of dating feminists, especially brown ones, have been updated:
Yeah, I said it: I absolutely refuse to even touch my wallet while on a date with a man.
The fierce young lady saying it, yeah is one Tiffanie Drayton, whose deep feminist wisdom will shake your tiny world:
I am a thinking, hardworking, autonomous human being. I am also a woman, and a Black woman at that, who is constantly fighting for the right to claim an independence that has been hindered and even made secondary to that of my male peers.
Damn those bastards. And therefore Ms Drayton has decided that politicised freeloading is the way forward:
Why should I believe I must overcome this inequality without the assistance of a man who wants to pursue me romantically? Why is my effort to reach for the cheque anything more than pretence? Society has never treated me as “equal” to the man sitting across from me, yet all of a sudden the playing field is levelled?
Yes, relying on a man to pay the bill, every time, is proof of Ms Drayton’s emancipation and empowerment as a thinking, hardworking, autonomous black woman. It’s how she fights for the right to claim her independence. It’s also reparation for collective male sin. Oh, sweet serendipity.
In other words, a man who pays for a date is merely compensating for society’s imbalance and inequality. He is restoring equality. This is especially true in dating White or Asian men who – statistically speaking – has [sic] a weekly median income of nearly 2-3 times that of women of colour.
You see, by paying for everything she wants, whenever she wants it, your money is simply being “returned to the women from which [sic] it was displaced in the very first place.” And so the proudly feminist author “completely rejects the premise” that “I have to pay my own way.”
Ms Drayton is a “freelance writer and activist,” one who struggles daily with The All-Powerful Patriarchy™, and also grammar. Regarding her tweets on racism and sexism – sorry, her “lectures” on racism and sexism – she says,
Google gets paid. I should too.
She adds,
If discussions on racism make you uncomfortable, avoid everything I write.
Given the dating conditions above, potential suitors may wish to expand that idea to contact in general.
I predict her next article will be about how unfair it is that men won’t date a thinking, hardworking, autonomous black woman who never pays for anything.
I predict her next article will be about how unfair it is that men won’t date a thinking, hardworking, autonomous black woman who never pays for anything.
Well, quite. But you see, she’s equal to any man, except whenever a bill turns up, at which point, economic chivalry is demanded. And subsidy is expected in the name of independence. Equality must be selective, opportunist and unconvincingly rationalised. It’s the feminist way.
Many of the men that I date, like my brother
Wow.
Wow.
I think what she means is, “Many of the men that I date have, like my brother…”
She’s a professional writer, you know.
she sounds like a pro.
In other words, a man who pays for a date is merely compensating for society’s imbalance and inequality. He is restoring equality.
My eyes are actually watering from the stinging reek of absolute bullshit wafting off that one sentence alone. Dear God …
‘I predict her next article will be about how unfair it is that men won’t date a thinking, hardworking, autonomous black woman who never pays for anything’.
The race card – play it any time, in any place, at any given situation.
Two of the last three dates I had the fortune to experience – three different women – included that moment where, late in the meal, feminine bladders suddenly beckoned their owners. How this biological need so perfectly coincided with the arrival of the check escapes me.
Both owners were significantly better off than I. There was no discussion, as if this rule was mutually understood and agreed.
And apparently it was. I now know I was merely being equalized.
PS: As had said justice been handed down exiting my single foray into long term relationshiphooddom months prior. As had my trading-up ex wrought, years prior.
So apparently there’s a hotwire somewhere relaying this and other handy tips and policy. Amongst said noble equality warriors.
She’s not unattractive. Any youngish, decent-looking woman has no problem finding dates, regardless of who pays, and despite the fact that she’s a man-hating radical. Us males don’t generally think very clearly once an available nubile female becomes even a remote possibility.
. . .your money is simply being “returned to the women from which [sic] it was displaced in the very first place.”
I’d be interested in hearing how she believes the money in question was displaced.
With her signature modesty, Ms Drayton tweets:
All this “damn writing and researching” must be why our fearless demander of free meals confidently based her article on a feminist factoid – the gender pay gap – that’s been repeatedly and comprehensively discredited.
Google gets paid. I should too.
Dunning–Kruger big time.
Dunning–Kruger big time.
That’s one for our list of excellent band names. I picture an ambitious 11-piece aiming for a lavish big band sound, which, sadly, escapes them due to the members’ various musical shortcomings, to which they, unlike the audience, remain oblivious. For instance, their playing would be either more or less in tune or more or less in time, but never both.
I’m coming to the conclusion that the entire history of gender relations is women’s ever-evolving rationale for why men owe them.
I predict her next article will be about how unfair it is that men won’t date a thinking, hardworking, autonomous black woman who never pays for anything.
Or possibly an article about how people aren’t taking her seriously as a black feminist intellectual. Because of sexism, racism and the patriarchal wickedness of basic grammar.
I read the comments section on the original link. Very entertaining.
Put your hands together (oir Jazz hands) for this weeks entertainment! It’s “Dunning–Kruger big time” with their Number #1 hit (all songs now get to chart at number one) Harrison Bergeron!
It’s feminism to demand the man pays on a date?
What next – it will be feminism to insist that the man opens doors for a lady, refrains from cursing in her presence, and waits for sex until marriage?
Hilarious. Feminists aren’t progressive. They are retro-grouches.
more or less in tune or more or less in time, but never both.
Kinda describes the few live performances I’ve seen (on TV) by Taylor Swift.
Many of the men that I date, like my brother
Snork.
It’s not the happiest choice of phrasing.
So THATS why we get paid more money… to pay for dates! Sooo femenist round logic!
Sorry, but in the comments section, she vehemently denies that she’s taking a feminist position.
In other words, a man who pays for sex is merely compensating for society’s imbalance and inequality.
Did you see what I did there?
I think I’ve worked out what she is. Any other exchange with her would merely be haggling over the price.
Surely the initial stages of sexula intercourse after culture – civilization reduced rape to a controllable state, were the result of a male providing sustenance to a female. After sometime this level of tradition evolved to monogamy the female in the “gamy” decided to reduce competition by labelling the provision of sexual intercourse for sustenance as prostitution and therefore taboo.
Are we now at the point when the pendulem is starting it’s return to a different equilibrium?
Basically, Ms Drayton expects reparations from her male suitors, supposedly for the sins of The All-Powerful Patriarchy. Because, says she, “society has never treated me as ‘equal’ to the man sitting across from me.” And hey, what else could possibly explain the disappointments, rejections and failures of her life?
I mean, she’s not at all obnoxious.
If discussions on racism make you uncomfortable, avoid everything I write.
This should not be a problem. Or a dependent clause. No if, in other words.
On my last couple of dates, I happily paid for everything. (Well, not everything. I can’t manage everything at my age.)
Mind you, I was a bit disconcerted when the ladies demanded ‘taxi fare’.
Mind you, I was a bit disconcerted when the ladies demanded ‘taxi fare’.
Perhaps I misconstrue but…you really should stick to processing them one at a time. It’s one of those odd exceptional situations in economics where supply exceeding capacity often results in costs going up.
If rabid feminism has any underlying genetic basis, the next generation should see the end of them.
Also, the hilarity of “the guy pays for the date” being made into some kind of feminist rallying cry cannot go unremarked.
Question arises, in this day and age of bravely ignoring traditional gender roles, what happens when its two girls on the date? Wash dishes all night instead of reaching for the wallet? And if they are in the kitchen, should they be barefoot?
The unintended consequences of a Harvard education.
I think this might be one of those rare occasions for which it’s perfectly acceptable to talk about “hitting the mother lode”.
Taxi fare. Sometimes making them go away and never come back is more than worth it.
Otherwise, one should set traps.
Not anything traceable, one would hope.
Probably should be just as natural as is possible. Men should always wear sturdy shoes, one never knows.
@ Nik
hitting the mother lode
You’re not wrong.
Good grief, where to begin with
that?
You could take hours going through
the full horror of it.
“Lol. Hence, you do not UNDERSTAND MY PIECE. Which begins at the intersection of RACE AND GENDER”
– Tiffanie Drayton
I do suspect that the intersection of Race and Gender is the street corner Tiffanie works.
Actually, reading her little hissy fit it becomes clear she’s working out her mommy issues:
There are many layers to that onion of dysfunctional family-tude (e.g. dad is never mentioned)
Maybe the time my parents grew up was “repressed” but their rules of dating etiquette, based on being grateful, humble and reciprocal to the one who asks, are still valid.
He or she who asks first should pay for the date. If you want to continue dating, then alternating who pays or suggesting “going dutch” should begin with the 2nd date — etc.
Figure out ways to exploit your date assures you may never date again.
Tiffanie will be deciding soon how many cats she can afford in her future.
She may go on lots of dates, but I suspect there will be very few breakfasts with Tiffany
Sooo…going “Dutch” would be which kind of exploitation?
And Michael McC–I usually don’t go on about typos, but “Sexula” will be playing at the 42nd Street Theatre next week. Let’s go Dutch.
LAURIE PENNY!?!!??! Gad, warn a person before the person hits the link, will ya?
She can’t write, but she calls herself a writer. I wonder if she can’t paint either. Then she could call herself a painter. Here we see the oft-repeated Leftist trope of earnestness substituting for talent. It’s a neat trick if you can pull it off.
The unintended consequences of a Harvard education.
So basically, Laurie is against mob shaming tactics when they’re aimed at her, but totally okay with mob shaming tactics when they’re aimed at people who aren’t Laurie Penny. Good to know.
Even now, what takes me aback is her knack for dishonesty. It’s quite shameless. It flows through her like a natural talent. “I am mortified by the thought of hurting other people, even by accident,” says Laurie, letting us know, again, about her “social conscience” and the importance of “being a decent human being,” i.e., like her. The words “decency,” “tolerance” and “compassion” are deployed repeatedly. Because she cares so very much.
This, however, is the same Laurie Penny who spent months playing chief hagiographer to Occupy, a movement-cum-fad premised on physical intimidation and acts of coercion against random people, on thuggery and threats, and whose gatherings frequently degenerated into squalor and mob violence. (And which Laurie hailed as promising a “society of mutual aid and trust… a new world order.”)
And this is the same Laurie Penny who endorses “principled political violence,” by which she means riots, looting and arson, and who approved of criminal thugs and far-left poseurs destroying people’s belongings and smashing windows onto terrified people, before passionately excusing their verminous behaviour. Not once, but several times. The same Laurie Penny who approved of a woman she doesn’t know being spat at, and who congratulated her younger sister for needlessly abusing a polite security guard. “I’m so fucking proud of you,” said she.
But she’s “mortified by the thought of hurting other people, even by accident.”
[My parents’] rules of dating etiquette… are still valid. He or she who asks first should pay for the date. If you want to continue dating, then alternating who pays or suggesting “going Dutch” should begin with the 2nd date — etc.
Yes, it’s funny how those terribly bourgeois and heteronormative courtesies are both more reciprocal and more practical than the neurotic ideology offered by Ms Drayton. A woman for whom dating seems to be about vengeance and reparation, and racialised statistics, rather than actual people and the possibility of love.
What man could resist?
Apparently if a man’s legs touch a woman on the underground he is groping her says Luise Burke, an Australian “homepage producer with a background in social media”
And it’s not in the Guardian…
explaining #sexism #patriarchy to patronizing fools.
speaking of patronizing fools…
I think any man who can grope with his legs deserves some sort of award for gross and fine motor skills. Some time ago I suggested in this blog that pole dancing should replace synchronised swimming in the Olympics. Can leg groping now also be included, if only to enlighten us all as to how to do it? Dr Johnson on dogs walking on their hind legs comes to mind.
But she’s “mortified by the thought of hurting other people, even by accident.”
That. All of that. 🙂
@ David
Re Laurie Penny and shameless dishonesty:
I remember reading someone describing the basic
‘commandments’ of a particular personality type.
One of them was: ‘I am who I tell you I am.’
Seems relevant.
Seems relevant.
What’s telling is that this pretentious, narcissistic and morally delinquent liar – this walking cartoon – has been so eagerly beckoned to the bosom of the institutional left and left-leaning media, here and overseas, as an exemplar, as someone to encourage.
She’s written for and appeared in just about every leftist publication; she appears on the BBC, where she was given half an hour of airtime to opinionate unchallenged and read from her own blog; she appears on Channel 4 as a supposedly credible commentator. She was given a year at Harvard, free of charge, thanks to petitioning by approving leftist editors, to attend lectures on “economic justice” and become a “leader in journalism” – a status she immediately seized on to browbeat others while calling herself a “scholar.” She’s been fêted in gushing terms by the New York Times, has been described as “the voice for a generation,” and has over 100,000 followers on social media. Last year, an enlarged projection of her face graced the walls of the Victoria & Albert Museum, barking revolutionary instructions to the little people below.
There are evidently quite a lot of people who don’t see what she is. Or who think that what she is is what one ought to be.
‘There are evidently quite a lot of people who don’t see what she is. Or who think that what she is is what one ought to be’.
I would say that there are in fact a very small number of people in this category. The problem is that they all seem to occupy key positions in the British media.
I can’t remember who coined the term ‘cry-bully’, but it fits Penny to a ‘t’. This is someone capable of the most repellent invective, but who throws a hissy fit when challenged. She is basically a psychotic narcissist who needs therapy, not the artificial adulation she’s receiving courtesy of the media elite.
The problem is that they all seem to occupy key positions in the British media.
Yes, that’s a big part of it. And that so many gatekeepers of ‘our’ media find her either congenial or titillating is something to ponder.
‘And that so many gatekeepers of ‘our’ media find her either congenial or titillating is something to ponder’.
It reminds me of accounts I read about the Soviet-Cuban relationship in the early 1960s. When Castro turned towards Moscow from 1959 onwards the reaction from Khrushchev and the Politburo was not just a strategic one. Anastas Mikoyan, the President (obviously a titular position) told the Cuban dictator that he and his comrades felt thrilled visiting his country. ‘It makes us feel like we are young again’.
Consider the fact that the Soviet Politburo were already finding dealing with other Communist states to be a disillusioning process. Mao was on the verge of breaking ranks with the USSR, as was Enver. Kim Il-Sung and Ho Chi Minh were pains in the arse. And behind all the bullshit about ‘socialist fraternity’ the men in Moscow realised that the only reason why Ulbricht, Kadar, Gomulka, Novotny et al were in power was because they had the threat of Red Army bayonets and tanks behind them.
Now here was this comrade from the Caribbean – right in Uncle Sam’s backyard – singing the praises of the Soviet model, and seeking an alliance with the USSR. It must have been intoxicating for Khrushchev and his mates, as it appeared to them that maybe the ‘correlation of forces’ was just about to shift in their favour …
And I think this is a factor here. Seumas Milne, Paul Mason, Alan Rusbridger … we’ve got a bunch of sad cases in their fifties whose entire belief systems collapsed in 1989. And along comes this bright young thing (in their opinion) who chants the old slogans and clings to the old certainties. And they can convince themselves that she is (to quote Michael Ezra on Harry’s Place) ‘the voice of her generation’. And maybe if they give her a platform and a megaphone, that’s what she’ll become.
It’s quite pathetic really. Owen ‘Goal’ Jones is benefiting from the same patronage.
There are evidently quite a lot of people who don’t see what she is. Or who think that what she is is what one ought to be .
Yes. That is what is so extraordinary.
People taking her at face value, and putting her on a pedestal. Adult, educated people in positions of influence who treat her with this bizarre reverence.
As sackcloth and ashes says, she is a psychotic narcissist.
It’s glaringly obvious.
So, given that, what is the matter with them?
From Lauries piece: The joke is that I’m an angry, sensitive child whose favourite phrase is “That’s not fair!”
She doesn’t appear to have changed.
And I think this is a factor here. Seumas Milne, Paul Mason, Alan Rusbridger… we’ve got a bunch of sad cases in their fifties whose entire belief systems collapsed in 1989. And along comes this bright young thing (in their opinion) who chants the old slogans and clings to the old certainties.
I think you may be on to something. Mason in particular seems to have a thing for her that’s… well, a little odd.
Owen ‘Goal’ Jones
Heh.
Kudos on your comment above, David.
Generally speaking, mechanically using compassion, I think, is internal compensation for lacking it naturally – for variously abusing others because such a climate had been normalized.
Advertising a narrow, invented, and especially mechanical, flattened virtue while playing a public part is a clinical symptom.
Tyrants are always going to change the world and fix the past and all its miscreants, aren’t they?
Concerning the public success of the public narcissist, they can only appeal to others of their approximate ilk. And a tribe needs a recognizable leader.
Who’s to say that progressive leftism – with its tenets of envy, coveting, dishonesty, projection, posing, and the intolerant dislike of others – isn’t just a hive of personality orders collectivized under one flag. They fit the description and we know PDs exist in no small numbers.
I think Penny just provided convincing proof that she is, to use a Lancastrian phrase, ” Not quite a full shilling”.
*bows*
Seriously, that paragraph about the book of politically-correct fairy tales tells one quite a bit, when the supposedly adult writer has not moved on from the self-righteous nine-year-old and learned to see oneself as others do and think “Actually, I must have sounded utterly priggish and pompous”, developed a sense of humour and grasped the notion of self-deprecation. That the latter has not occurred is illustrated by the tale of the hot shower in the cold flat in Berlin, where she is berating herself for her transgressions against the PC code, rather than any real shortcomings on her part.
Being permanently angry, lacking a sense of humour and a sense of perspective, and revelling in one’s righteousness- these are traits shared by extremists at either end of the political spectrum and it is why most people find extremism distasteful- it’s not just the politics, it’s the way they go about it. I’ve always thought that the Right tend to overdo the braggadocio, whereas the Left tend more towards displays of false modesty and disingenuousness, but those traits are interchangeable.
Whether one is a nine-year-old, a late teenager up at university, or a fifty-something, the natural human reaction is “For God’s sake lighten up. What on Earth is wrong with her?”
mechanically using compassion,
Bingo. Based on what Laurie says and does, and the glaring and repeated contradictions between the two, it seems to me that she’s not so much compassionate, or at all compassionate, but simply desperate to appear so. In ways that are often incongruous or implausible, and to an extent that invites suspicion. It’s as if her pantomime of selflessness and virtue were a theatrical costume, the gaudier the better. Or camouflage, perhaps.
Now here was this comrade from the Caribbean – right in Uncle Sam’s backyard – singing the praises of the Soviet model, and seeking an alliance with the USSR. It must have been intoxicating for Khrushchev and his mates, as it appeared to them that maybe the ‘correlation of forces’ was just about to shift in their favour …
That’s a great analysis, and it should also be remembered that eventually Castro would go on to suggest nuking the US in the event of an American conventional invasions, which left Khrushchev shaken and realising what a deranged fuckwit he’d gotten himself tangled up with. I wonder if the same analogy might apply here?
It’s as if her pantomime of selflessness and virtue were a theatrical costume, the gaudier the better. Or camouflage, perhaps.
I cannot tell you how literally true that is. The virtue actor as a figure of many merits, and all of them borrowed from a script patched together from yet other appearances.
It is the malignant pearl wrapped around some denied primordial wound. They’re pedaling as fast as they can.
Dishonesty and appearances-centrism are the twin manifestations of Peck’s formulation (from my link). And they’re one and the same.
Or camouflage, perhaps.
You’ve got to have an *excuse* for telling people what to do (or smashing their windows).
You’ve got to have an *excuse* for telling people what to do (or smashing their windows).
And if you’re looking for a pretext, a fig-leaf, for all that seething and spite, Marxoid politics is the one-stop shop. If you’re compulsively self-flattering and thrill to the idea of coercing others, having power over them, or punishing those who are more successful, well-adjusted, or just prettier than you, all while seeming pious, then Marxism and its variants are practically catnip. And so it attracts certain personality types in high concentrations.
Meanwhile, in Canada:
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/becoming-disabled-by-choice-not-chance-transabled-people-feel-like-impostors-in-their-fully-working-bodies
Meanwhile, in Canada:
For some reason the word picky sprang to mind.
. . . . Luise Burke, an Australian “homepage producer with a background in social media”
So she has a Facebook account? And might also have a twit account?
Heh…Transabled…So do you suppose that Penny Red, Polly T, Amanda Marcotte, Ed Shultz, Martin Bashir, et al are Translucid and their rantings are simply a cry for help?
I don’t believe Penny’s story about taking a hot painful shower in a cold flat. I believe she wrote that she did, only to make stupid people believe that she did. I’d have to witness, in person, any of her alleged self-abasements, to believe she actually performed them. She lies to herself about her own virtue–she’d lie to her readers, too.
‘I wonder if the same analogy might apply here?’
I think the Soviets eventually realised that they’d got themselves a shit lottery ticket in due course, when they figured out how much it cost the USSR to keep the Cuban economy afloat (not least by buying the sugar crop at well above market price).
‘I don’t believe Penny’s story about taking a hot painful shower in a cold flat. I believe she wrote that she did, only to make stupid people believe that she did’.
We have (a) false claims from her that she was forced to dance topless with tassels at a burlesque, (b) a misrepresentation of a confrontation with David Starkey during a debate (which could be disproved by anyone who could do a Youtube search), and (c) the most recent claim that her grandmother was awarded the George Cross in WWII (whereas in fact she was one of the citizens of Malta who were honoured by the collective award of said decoration in 1942).
So I think outright lying is within the bounds of possibility.
So I think outright lying is within the bounds of possibility.
I think it’s probably pathological.
Sadly.
There’s no pleasing some people.
I’m trans-compassionate — I’m selfish and wholly uncaring, but deep inside I want to be someone with great empathy. Cis-compassionate people are often appealed to hear this, and my other real self feels hurt and oppressed.
“Often appalled to hear”. I guess I’m a trans-bad speller too.
claims from her that she was forced to dance topless with tassels at a burlesque
Whoa there!
Any pictures or video?
Just for verification purposes, you understand.
So I think outright lying is within the bounds of possibility.
I’ve recently had the surreal experience of a staff meeting that was totally rigged to just be a recitation of a monologue, with attempted commands—either what was demanded was already occurring several times over and didn’t need bringing up, or, what was demanded was pure fantasy that was declared to be accepted as reality.
During the monologue, I easily pointed out a totally blatant lie that the other two staff were just accepting as reality, and within fifteen minutes after the meeting, when doing a cursory look through the meeting notes, I found the next lie. Following that, an email summary was sent out which claims that the entire meeting was a recitation of absolute truth and will always be considered such—never mind even getting caught lying in the middle of their own rigged meeting, the plotters just kept right on going without even a blink.
the disability movement are also seeking their due, or at very least a bit of understanding in a public that cannot fathom why anyone would want to be anything other than healthy and mobile.
People who are healthy and mobile just don’t know what’s good for them!
I would pay for her and me to go to the fair – to drop her in the dunk tank.
And then take her on Judge Judy to argue for getting my money back.
Takes your money and abuses you – I’ve heard there are women who do that professionally.
Forgive me for, as it were, ‘cutting to the chase’ and thus employing moderate crudity in the process but Ms Drayton’s lofty dating demands as well as spurious justifications for her repellent attitude seem like one big unsubtle excuse for simply being a bit of a ‘tight arse’ (financially-speaking) all in all…..
Surely not!
If a tree falls in a forest and there’s no white man there, is it still his fault?
Cis, trans, homo or hetero?
These becomeimportant in such unusual edge cases.