Wednesday, December 07, 2011

Candace Bushnell & traditional marriage

This won't come as a great shock, but Candace Bushnell, the writer behind the Sex & The City TV series, sees herself as a non-traditional woman.

When Bushnell was 43 she married a man 10 years younger. She has described this large age gap as a great positive:

...the reason my marriage works is that it's not traditional. When I was younger, I dated men of various ages, some a little younger, some several years older. And I saw a pattern begin to emerge: Whenever I was with an older man, all those societal dictates about male and female roles would creep into my subconscious. I'd start acting like the little woman, and then my behavior would make me sick and I'd rebel by staying out at nightclubs until four in the morning. I knew what I wanted - an equal, balanced relationship in which both members could shine, a union in which I'd have a partner as opposed to a provider ... equal partnership is something many women want...My fellow cougars and I found our footing in relationships with younger men.

And by the way, our men don't usually resemble boy toys ... More likely, he's confident, open-minded and willing to make his own rules.

And she has described the inspiration behind Sex and The City as an attempt to liberate women from the "injustice" of the rules of society:

I’m 52 years old now, and when I was a young girl growing up in the 1960s, there were a lot of dos and don'ts. We, young girls, were told what was permissible and what was not, and how we were to behave and conduct ourselves. And I object to that. And this injustice has always driven me. SATC, with all the sexual liberation and freedom expressed by the women characters, reflects a society unfairly imposing itself on women. 

But Bushnell's cougar vision of liberation is floundering. Following on from Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore's divorce, we now learn that Bushnell is divorcing her husband after discovering his relationship with a much younger woman. Her non-traditional approach to marriage didn't work.

And I don't think that's entirely accidental. Bushnell is mistaken when it comes to equality. A 43-year-old woman is going to struggle to give equally in a marriage with a 33-year-old man. She won't be able to give him her youthful beauty and passion. She won't be able to give him children. The sacrifices will come mostly from his side, not hers.

It's interesting, too, that Candace Bushnell felt the impulse of masculine and feminine roles only with older men, rather than with younger ones. Her rejection of men older than her suggests that she is not accepting of a man expressing a masculine role as a husband and father within a marriage. Again, I don't think that's a giving attitude from a woman. It's as if she wants a marital relationship which resembles the unstable, free-floating, sex based relationships that occur on campus before men and women become conscious of their adult roles. For a woman to insist on that kind of a relationship when married requires a husband who is, in my opinion, either immature or who is forced to suppress his adult personality.

And why? Consider again what Candace Bushnell says about being with older men:

Whenever I was with an older man, all those societal dictates about male and female roles would creep into my subconscious. I'd start acting like the little woman, and then my behavior would make me sick and I'd rebel by staying out at nightclubs until four in the morning.

What does that say about Bushnell's feminine identity? It's not something through which she can connect with a man anymore. She has defined it in a negative way as something externalised and oppressive. But this too then limits what she is able to give in a marriage. The equality of marriage being a meeting point between the masculine and the feminine is lost.

55 comments:

  1. "Bushnell is divorcing her husband after discovering his relationship with a much younger woman. Her non-traditional approach to marriage didn't work."

    The only surprising thing about this is that it came as a surprise for her!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good article. Marriage as an extended hook up does not lead to stability. I guess one of the questions is what is the appeal of the 43 year old woman to the 33 year old man in the first place?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "what is the appeal of the 43 year old woman to the 33 year old man in the first place?"

    Especially when the 43 year old woman is a notorious whore!

    ReplyDelete
  4. A nice hot cup of schadenfreude, served up fresh. Delicious!

    ReplyDelete
  5. what is the appeal of the 43 year old woman to the 33 year old man in the first place?

    Jesse, I've tried to write an answer to this but find it difficult. Women like Candance Bushnell and Demi Moore are relatively sexually attractive for their ages. Maybe that was enough as a beginning and then romantic love took over. But it's still unusual as most men would baulk at not being able to have children of their own; of stepping into someone else's family; of their wives hitting menopause whilst they were still relatively young; and, as a previous commenter noted, of their wives already having given themselves to so many other men for so many years.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "what is the appeal of the 43 year old woman to the 33 year old man in the first place?"

    I'll take a wild guess. Could it be money?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Another lost uterus, our women have been psychologically conditioned to hate themselves and by extension their own men.

    The generational epilogue of a freak show. Just ignore them. Sterile, bitter and lonely, useless to know.

    Why should any man care?

    ReplyDelete
  8. dfordoom,

    "Could it be money?"

    I worry that some men may be happy taking a bit of a back seat role in relationships. If the woman is older she is likely to be more confident than a younger woman which is attractive, she is also likely to be less needy and will possibly also have a higher sex drive. It seems obvious though that such a relationship will struggle over the long term so perhaps the guys aren't thinking long term.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mark,

    My mother is older than my father and frankly, she still looks younger in her mid-60s then he in his late 50s. I was looking at her in the kitchen just last night and I thought "dear lord...that's creepy" Good for me though!! :) :)

    No, the guy was a ballet dancer.

    Natalie Portman's husband is going to cheat on her as well. Which is probably why they have yet to have gotten married.

    This is a BALLET DANCER syndrome. In fact, the girl he cheated on ONLY had youth on her side. She is rather ugly and non-white.

    I also have a couple who just had a child who has a 7 year age gap.

    Of course, a big difference in these relationships is they all had children.

    But other than that......

    I agree with you...I don't Candace Bushnell went into marriage with the right mind-set and that's why she chose...

    A BALLET DANCER

    (every women knows to avoid those types)

    ReplyDelete
  10. You know what I think the problem is....

    It's kinda like I read all these blogs and I get the impression that the underlying attitude is...

    "If women don't do exactly what we dictate then they are worthless"

    Now rationally I know "Well the path that Mark is talking about is simple biological constraints. It's nothing personal whatsoever. It's nature."

    But to a woman....It's just kinda shit and we don't want to hear it.

    Because it's like....Some of us do work hard, some of us do have problems finding a guy...so then we just want to slap you men away and not deal with you guys.

    Let's face it, because of biology men are able to get away with more. And I think that is the root of feminist angst.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Here, I have it Mark...

    This post is all fucked up. And this is why.....

    Because your blaming it all on the woman. Just like you blame the birthrate on single women, and not married couples who only have 2 or less kids.

    It's all Candace's Fault. She should have a more traditional view.

    To some extent I agree...
    She should have, because if she had she would have married a better guy.

    But the bottom line is....The Man Took the Marriage Vow with Her. He knew her age, he knew her views, yet he still took that sacred oath.

    This man is going to be like Kelsey Grammar...every 10 years get a new woman no matter what her age.

    But you don't criticize him. You don't say that Cheating on a Woman you Made a *in my world* Religious Vow to is Wrong?

    Men Get Away with Everything

    ReplyDelete
  12. And what about the Immoral Whore who broke up a Marriage?

    What happened to us condemning Immoral Whores?

    Sure Candace wrote about them, and maybe was a whore (not marriage breaker though)....but still....He took that vow.

    ReplyDelete
  13. And there's one more thing....

    I think the biggest hit to the female mind is simply that there is no such thing as a friend.

    A man isn't marrying you because he cares. He's marrying you to get kids and to take advantage of your youthful sexuality.

    If you want unconditional love get a dog. Whatever you do don't try finding it with a person.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Five Anonymous posts in a row, I wonder who this could be? ;).

    I don't think Mark is saying men get away with everything and there have been plenty of discussions on this site about such matters from the male perspective, many of them quite heated. In this instance Candace is stating that she’s hit on the new formula for success for a professional woman in marrying a younger guy. The post is quite rightly pointing out how flimsy such a set up is and its entirely appropriate that this should be pointed out.

    Unfortunately everyone on this side of politics, be it male or female, is operating under some degree of difficult circumstances so I would encourage you not to take these discussions too personally.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jesse my posts are emotion fuelled rants after reading not just Mark but all the men's blogs.

    If you combine All of Them....It's the same message over and over.

    I really hate that "What does she expect....she didn't give him her youth so she doesn't deserve love"

    The other day Roosh had some post about how he talked to a feminist careerist and how the men would 'take care of her'

    And I'm like HA! This is why feminism is appealing! To have laughable men like Roosh talk about caring about a woman!!

    I should have commented on the post about Female Doctors and unhappiness.

    It's tragic. The hardest working women with the most intelligence.

    That's really all I have to say.

    This entire thing is tragic.

    Men do get away with more, and the ones who do get away with it tend to be the lowest of the slime---as this Money Grubbing/Lying/Whatever Ballet Dancer shows.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "And I'm like HA! This is why feminism is appealing! "

    Feminism is appealing the same way all identity politics are appealing they are a form of bribe that appeals to one particular groups defining feature thats why there is black politics, Feminism, Communism, homosexuality etc.
    You can make an identity political grouping with all the associated activism and legal support for almost anything but take note of what is not allowed namely anything to do with indigenous Europeans.
    The majority of people who are taken in by feminism etc are two foolish to see they are being played , they let one aspect define who they are and the people who stand to gain from these movements (politicians) reap the rewards.
    Largely why straight white christian males (and a lesser extent the females) feel so disenfranchised is that politicians have abandoned us. They aren't legally allowed to sell to us identity politics and whats more many white europeans have rejected it themselves from years of it being made taboo.

    In short theres nothing appealing about feminism to any woman that isn't greedy and seeking a way of cheating in society by political advantage.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anon:

    I think the biggest hit to the female mind is simply that there is no such thing as a friend.

    But are women really looking for a friend? A lot of men have the experience that being put in the friend category by a woman means being rejected as a prospective boyfriend.

    A man isn't marrying you because he cares. He's marrying you to get kids and to take advantage of your youthful sexuality.

    I don't know if most women see it this way. In my experience, women are pleased to be able to give their husbands children (I once had a female work colleague tear up at this thought). They also like to be reassured of their sexual desirability.

    So if the timing is right there is a complementarity at work.

    Let's face it, because of biology men are able to get away with more.

    Not necessarily. A woman like Candace Bushnell had a huge biological advantage in her 20s. She could have used that advantage to get her pick of the available family oriented guys.

    It's a question of whether women leverage the advantage they have in their 20s to set themselves up for life or whether they squander it.

    you're blaming it all on the woman. Just like you blame the birthrate on single women, and not married couples who only have 2 or less kids.

    It's interesting. We trads get accused by MRAs of pedestalising women and then we also get accused of blaming it all on women.

    Who should I blame when Candace Bushnell prefers to sleep around in her 20s and even her 30s, before finally deciding she'll marry in her 40s. Is that the fault of men?

    Obviously it's her fault and also reflects a problem with the kind of ideas that women are being brought up with.

    As for couples having too few children, that's often a product of delayed marriage. If we could get marriage back into the 20s, the birth rate would certainly rise.

    And what about the Immoral Whore who broke up a Marriage?

    She has done the wrong thing. I have to say, though, that I find Candace Bushnell as a 43-year-old agreeing to marry a man who is 33-years-old to be a very selfish act.

    She should have told him "I know you're attracted to me right now, but as you mature you will want more from a marriage than I can possibly give you. It would be wrong for me to consider marriage with you."

    ReplyDelete
  18. It's kinda like I read all these blogs and I get the impression that the underlying attitude is...

    "If women don't do exactly what we dictate then they are worthless"

    ...

    But to a woman....It's just kinda shit and we don't want to hear it.


    Well, my dear, perhaps you should not read it. It's a bit silly to voluntarily go somewhere, find it uncongenial, and then demand that it change to suit you. It's also massively entitled, but mostly silly.

    Because it's like....Some of us do work hard, some of us do have problems finding a guy...so then we just want to slap you men away and not deal with you guys.

    No one's forcing you to deal with us. If anything, it's women who have forced their way, unbidden and unwanted, into male spheres. By all means: Go away.

    Let's face it, because of biology men are able to get away with more. And I think that is the root of feminist angst.

    That is so much bullshit. From the endless perqs given to attractive women, to the "old" doctrine of "women and children first", to the new doctrine of the endless boosterism of women in every arena of life, to the "pussy pass" used to excuse bad female behavior and to minimize female crimes, women get away with murder every day.

    Men have just two advantages: We don't need women (an evolutionary legacy of the pre-monogamous sexual marketplace), and we build everything that matters. Unfortunately, the employment of those advantages tends to have terrible consequences for any society that turns on its men -- but you called down the fire, and now it's here.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Twenty,

    I didn't mind anon's comments - better for her to be honest about her reactions.

    She's writing from the perspective of a woman who hasn't been able to find someone.

    I can't really help her with that. What I want to try to do is to help another generation avoid the same mistake of delayed family formation.

    And that means being upfront myself - blunt even - in trying to explain what motivates men to make big commitments to women.

    Since part of the message is that youthful passion and fertility do matter, that won't go down well with older women.

    But it still has to be said.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Some women aren't comfortable with the provider, providee role because it's too risky.

    It's like putting all your eggs in one basket.

    Men started reading Playboy and that was essentially an act of collective cheating.

    So then the spell was broken.

    Candace is merely a product of that.

    And personally, I think the root of the problem is that Mr. Ballet Dancer...

    Was...

    A...

    Lout.

    (and possibly after her money)

    [I think if you can't have kids u should let the guy go...if they had had two kids together I think he still would have cheated]

    I also think that if you read the article in its entirety you have taken it a bit out of context. She was defending hers marriage of 7 years to a middle aged man after the media had labeled her the definition of Cougar. The media provoked her...No surprise there.

    ReplyDelete
  21. My response to guy who commented....

    I live here on Mark's blog, for two years now.

    Ultimately I agree with everything, and most of the time I write "Excellent post. Well said"

    But occasionally My Man Rat Radar Goes Off and I have to give the higher sympathy score to the woman.

    This Candace Bushnell thing is man rat radar big time.

    Women we are emotional and if a guy pays enough attention and proposes and stuff...we go "Maybe he's the one"

    So I think that's what happened to Candace...she was like "Wow...maybe...he is the one?" and then her nagging doubts left her.

    Besides, he is kinda old looking for his age.

    I think if he had a 43 year old wife he still would have cheated with the 25 year old.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I'll spit it out...

    (Anyone who may know me in real life on this blog stay quiet you)

    I seem to have gotten a younger man (7 years) stuck to me.

    I did nothing but stand there. Said man came to me. I do not call, I do not text, I do not email. I do nothing but exist.

    See after awhile we women break down. You are all so charming it is hard to say no.

    (Luckily I have a thing for blonde Scandic types)

    But if a woman is pursued by a younger man relentlessly .....I'm sorry But men need to take responsibility for their side as well.

    So yeah, I feel really bad for Candace.

    ReplyDelete
  23. And let me add, the old guy age 36, who I went after with stars in my eyes....

    Won't life one single finger to help out the relationship.

    Don't you love men?

    We women go after the older ones who ignore us, then get pursued by a young one and then we get condemned when the young one wakes up to the reality and cheats.

    Gotta love it!

    LOL! oh well...

    ReplyDelete
  24. @Mark

    It's nice that you don't mind Anon's comments, but I wasn't attempting to speak for you. I was addressing a particularly insane and destructive mindset (go somewhere, demand that it change to suit you) and remarks directed to the manosphere in general. ("I read all these blogs", &c.)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Do you know what I love, is when women try to speak for me- especially feminists. No, I really don't appreciate it.

    For whatever ills- a man does not, even a socialist liberal emasculated specimen have the hubris to think that women need to be denied homemaking and motherhood. As in raising your own children instead of handing them to strangers, because most women would choose who they really are over any narcissistic career for nothing but their own ends.

    When I do things for work, there is no passion, no love- but when I do things for my family and friends even if I hate it with every fiber of my being, there is an undercurrent of pure selfless love to it.

    Men don't tote out the card that a woman is too young to know what she wants in her twenties. Who has the audacity and arrogance to claim such a presumption? Usually, a feminist and careerist so scared to lose their superficial and materialistic existence that they will sell out their entire gender just to get what they want.

    As a young woman who wants to support whoever her husband may be and raise her own children- I can't find sympathy for women like this.
    They have the power to change the system- to undo the damage that has left their lives so empty and broken.
    All women like Candace have to do is to tell the truth, stop living in a world of denial and fix what they broke.

    So no, I can't feel sorry for someone who would watch those younger than them living their illusion to ruination. I feel sorry for the women who got duped into thinking 'Sex and the City' was the recipe to a fulfilling life and who was that written by again, responsible for all that heartache?

    I guess I was wrong, sometimes bad things happen to bad people too!

    ReplyDelete
  26. All women like Candace have to do is to tell the truth, stop living in a world of denial and fix what they broke.

    Well put.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous raises the issue of men cheating. I would suggest that cheating is more likely in situations where people are dominated by their passions and desires, you fall passionately in love with someone then passionately out of love etc. Whilst passion and desire is great it must be tempered with social expectations and personal responsibility.

    As a women you have to look to see if the guy is solid, if he's an artist living on the edge he probably isn't. If he's got a big smile and is easy with the ladies you have to consider that. In days gone by it probably wasn't best to lead with your heart and emotions in deciding relationships, or long lasting relationships (can I say the second without drawing criticism?) and in today’s world where standards are much loser I would say its a no no.

    Dating is surely ok, with Candace et al they see men for periods with little to no expectation of permanence, but you do have to set the tone a little in the relationship or else it can go along the lines of a hook up.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "A man isn't marrying you because he cares. He's marrying you to get kids and to take advantage of your youthful sexuality."

    Only a feminist, blinded by hate, could say something like that. Feminists seem to be determined to do everything in their power to poison relations between men and women.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Well, my dear, perhaps you should not read it. It's a bit silly to voluntarily go somewhere, find it uncongenial, and then demand that it change to suit you. It's also massively entitled, but mostly silly.

    And it's classic feminist behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Here's my take on Candace Bushnell...

    A girl who got caught up in New York and wanted a writing career.

    Unfortunately, you can't have a major publisher and not have a few sex scenes in your book.

    So she was able to find a 'sex niche' with the big head honchos.

    In exchange for her selling her soul, they used her for their own diabolical purposes.

    ----------
    From personal experience ...I'm more than confident that her parents were very proud of her. Many parents want their children to be successful, but do not understand the true costs of that success. So she had no one in her life saying "hey Candace, this may not be fun and games but this is societal destruction."

    Let's face it...If I had been Candace my parents would have cheered me on and been much prouder of me then they are now.

    For a female child, that means a lot.
    -------------

    And remember this is the early 90s...many of the trends with immigration that we see now...and the new vulgar young people...Were not so evident.

    At that time, Candace probably thought nothing more of it then a fun job writing a modern day 'Dear Ruth' column. And she had no idea it would turn into a tv show.

    Furthermore, I doubt any of the sex stuff is true. And if it is I go "oooh Candace....bad girl" But I don't think it is...high IQ women are rarely smart and whores at the same time. Working and writing makes one two tired to whore around.

    Anyways..........

    I don't blame Candace one bit. I really don't. I blame the bosses at the New Yorker and the bosses at HBO who WANTED the material.

    Candace is simply a figurehead, for their diabolical plans.

    It's like Fame always comes at a cost.

    ReplyDelete
  32. That brings me back to my dilemma with Male Female Age Gaps.

    I think we are seeing a rise in older women younger men precisely because of two changes in society that Mark talks about...

    - Class Mobility
    - Vulgar, Sexually Explicit young women

    Earlier today I was stalking the old posts on the younger guys facebook profile. The ex-gf was incredibly mean, crude, vulgar...And very hurtful! It was a bit shocking.

    Obviously I do not know any these women that you men complain about. So when I see them in existence on Facebook it's always a shock.

    What's happening is there is no social mobility...So High IQ men who are born in a more lower social setting....are not getting out of that social setting at the same rate they did in the past.

    So they are stuck with the lower class women. Who over the years, have devolved at a much higher rate.

    So then these men latch onto older women from high socio-economic, moral backgrounds as a lifejacket to pull themselves out.

    I think that's what is happening. Obviously this does not apply to Candace. This is based upon the three older women/younger man relationships I see in real life.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Sorry I think you're off base. Candace's younger man wouldn't have been some economically deprived guy looking for a chance, he would have been a young professional in a similar industry. They would have got together for convenience and emotional satisfaction rather than economic reasons, it was an “equal” relationship remember.

    On the point about Candace being a “victim” in all this that’s preposterous, she would have been a committed advocate of this sexually explorative style of life, or at least an advocate for its open discussion. Even if others stand to gain from her work she’s not merely a “victim of the marketplace”. Not all writing requires sex, even if “sexing it up” does help sales, and there’s plenty of other types of writing work available. Candace herself would be the first to refute any suggestion that she was arm twisted into this and would have said her work was “empowering for women”.

    As for your observations, “based on three relationships”, that’s a tiresome way to put things and lacks real substance. I would suggest you frame your points to include more argument/analysis and less anecdote.

    ReplyDelete
  34. All writing requires sex to get published. To get published you have to do the following:

    - Black/Minority Hero
    - Bash White Men
    - The Help- 'nuff said
    - Attack Muslims with BIG GUNS (I'm reading Clive Cussler The Jungle)
    - If you don't choose the above, then you gotta have Sex Sex Sex!!


    Candace merely followed the female path of writing about Relationships---with the modern day requisite.

    At the time she probably had no idea what she was really doing and her parents were probably So Proud of Her and Encouraging of Her and her New Success...and probably liberal 60s types themselves.

    Anyways.....Momentary Snottiness


    So Sorry Jessie For Throwing Out Theories!!!

    Damn myself for trying to find theories to fit the limited life experiences I have.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I want to go back to Parents.

    In all the relationships I've seen that have been interracial....The parents have always paved the way in liberaldom.

    The children have just followed through on what the parent already started. (Ex: Father obsessed with black football players...then child ends up dating black man or woman)

    Also, I have a question...

    Why was there a shift in Fathers desires for daughters?

    Fathers at one point wanted their daughters to get married, but then suddenly Fathers wanted their daughters to be successful.

    Is it due to the falling birthrate and no sons?

    The reason why I bring this up is because in the article Mark quoted...Candace's dad was REALLY proud of her.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I'll just keep talking.....

    Back in the 1800s Romance Novels were great. Perfect. Upright Man rescues damsel in distress from evil villains. I've read several.

    Then something weird happened. I have never read one....but evidently by the 50s and 60s romance novels had taken a dark turn.

    They were basically rape scenes in these books, from what I've been told. The women had no power and were at the will of the man.

    So these types of books dominated the mass market for many years.

    From this perspective, Candace Bushnell was writing from a position of power versus the relative impotence portrayed in the novels of her youth. And she will never feel sorry for that, and coming from her perspective...She really never should.


    Honestly, there must be some validity to women's complaints about Not 'Traditional Roles', but something going on in the 50s and 60s.

    Something in society changed over the course of 100 years --- from sweet adventure romance to the rape books to women trying to break free of what they 'perceived' as traditional roles.

    But I don't think we've ever really gotten to the root of that.

    My theory is...Playboy. I think that in the 1800s there was no pornography thus the literature was wholesome.

    Then in the 1900s we saw pornography....but womens roles did not change with the pornography....Thus leading to Rape Romance Novels.

    Then women rebelled in the only direction one can when society has porn.

    ReplyDelete
  37. So in the manner outlined in the previous post...

    The root of it all is pornography justified by Mark's liberal autonomy theory.

    As long as our society is based upon Porn...

    You aren't going to be able to change women from the current trajectory they are on.

    Traditional Roles for Women In A Society that Allows Porn is Nothing More than Sexual Subjugation. (This is a theory I am throwing out there for brighter minds to chomp on.)

    So that I believe may be the missing piece to the puzzle and explains why women in the last 40 years rebelled against roles they had never before felt the need to rebel from.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Back in the day mass published novels were considered porn lite and were considered inappropriate for well brought up ladies. Of course they're tame by today's standards because everything is coarser today, when the boundaries get continually pushed you need bigger action to create the stimulus.

    From the top down we got explorations into decadence and loose morality, eg Wilde and DH Lawrence, and that filtered into to the mass market. Were women's novel's in the 60's more grim than today's? I doubt it but I'm no expert. The Candace novels track the rise of "girl power" concepts, started by feminism, and playing to people's newer attitudes of relationships and causal bed hopping as primarily sources of personal fulfillment and experimentation rather than relational permanence or right conduct. Its not some conspiracy its merely an enhanced exaggeration of how many people live, which is based on what's perceived as acceptable and desirable and reflecting ideas many women want, or think they want.

    On the point about father's fostering the ambitions of go getting feminist daughters I'm not qualified to comment. I would suggest though that any such fathers encourage their daughters to marry at a reasonable age and have them prepare for it well in advance of time.

    ReplyDelete
  39. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I agree that you can't take porn out of the equation. If a man looks at a woman as nothing more than t&a that will reflect his relationship with her. Its also that case though that porn uptakes have skyrocketed in response to troubled or uncertain relationships between the sexes. If a man can’t get anywhere with women or if he has to walk such a tightrope in his relationships he will increasingly look to porn. Can you seriously say that the huge spike in the divorce rates was caused by porn?

    ReplyDelete
  41. I suspect that porn is a symptom rather than a cause. Feminists like to play the porn card because it gets them off the hook. It's part of their agenda whereby men are always to blame while women never have to take any responsibility for the social problems tearing our society apart.

    It would make much more sense to blame the contraceptive pill for the disintegration of marriage.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I agree with that point. Porn encourages bad habits, but men will still look at women without it. There's nothing you can do to encourage a man to totally ignore a woman's physical appearance. One of the things that irritates women about porn is that it breaks the monopoly they'd like to have, "you're sleeping on the couch tonight honey" doesn't have quite the sting it used to.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This is where we disagree I think...

    "The Candace novels track the rise of "girl power" concepts, started by feminism, and playing to people's newer attitudes of relationships and causal bed hopping as primarily sources of personal fulfillment and experimentation rather than relational permanence or right conduct."

    Obviously you are right on many many points...but...

    I think "Girl Power" of the Candace Bushnell variety and NOT the communist infiltrator variety.....Was a reaction to men having all of the sexual power for a short amount of time.

    Playboy was the 1950s, the sick romance novel I keep referring to was early 70s (When Candace was in her later teens--Age 15)

    So women were stuck in traditional roles for around 20 years while men had access to almost modern day pornography. I'm using 1950s Playboy to 1969. And Before Playboy there was Esquire.

    I explain "Rape Romance" by this sudden switch---Pornography is now allowed, but women must maintain their traditional virginal roles.

    Candace reads rape romance during her most formative years.

    Then she looks around and see's the culture turning More to Pornography and Free Sex. If women were to steadfastly stick to a 'Traditional Role' while the society around them becomes more and more sexualized...

    Then she would find herself a sex slave. Quite literally.

    So then since one cannot put the Cultural Sex Back Into the Box....one can try to Ride the Bucking Bronco

    So that's what lead to the Girl Power. An attempt to at least have control over the sex.



    Keys things to note...The Media was pushing cultural liberalism...The type of women like Candace are merely reacting to what the media did, and then of course being exploited to continue the project along. Too bad Candace does not realize any of this. But everyone's IQ has limits.

    ReplyDelete
  44. By Porn, I don't mean internet porn.

    I mean just like Victoria's Secret Commercials

    And Days of Our Lives Sex Scenes

    Cultural Porn

    ReplyDelete
  45. James Bond!!!!

    Cultural porn!

    See...we had James Bond...yet women were still 'stuck' in traditional roles.

    Perfect example.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Ok so Imagine this...

    Your a 15 year old female virgin reading Rape Porn Novels and Watching James Bond.

    Sex has been released onto society. But at this point in time the men are in firm control.

    That's what causes the 'girl power' mindset.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Its no secret that men are more interested in sex and so will be more interested in pornography. For you to say that marriage is illegitimate as long as porn exists, something which has been around forever, is ridiculous. As for romance novels they are read by women so their content is a matter for women, generally you don’t hear men getting into a twist about them. It is not acceptable for you to say “Oh men have porn, (something much more prevalent now than in the past) therefore women should be able to do what they like”. This is such a stupid statement that I’m not sure quite how to respond to it. Both sexes will have idiosyncrasies that the other sex will have to adapt to to some extent, and both sexes will have instincts that need to be curbed. The process of marriage, in the context of societal expectations, is to iron those out. Any sex that wants everything its own way is riding for a fall and any sex that thinks it can “unilaterally” set the conditions for marriage, including yours, is mistaken.

    For you to say that marriage is nothing but the subjugation of women is to adopt a feminist anti-marriage argument and such attitudes given full expression are the chief reason why marriage today is so unstable.

    As for "girl power" you seem to think that this was a response to the loosening up of sexual morality for the benefit of men. Girl power is not about what men do, therefore its not about "controlling the sex" or men, its purely about what women do. Its a movement undertaken with virtually no regard for men at all and men are expected to slot in with it for the convenience of women. You will notice in Sex in the City that all the lead characters are women and men are given barely any role. Any equivalent "male power" of the past, ie whoring it up, was never given societal sanction in the way that girl power expects to be given it.

    If the advent of the pill led to boyfriends pressuring their girlfriends for sex before marriage it was still more than acceptable for the girl to say no. How on earth is "who runs the world? girls!" the equivalent of that?

    ReplyDelete
  48. No no no, I have been misinterpreted.

    I'm saying that what happened is The Media Promoted Images of James Bond, Playboy Type Men back in the 1950s and 1960s and possibly earlier.

    Back in the early 1900s men were as clueless as women oftentimes when it came to sex. Your wife was oftentimes your only partner. Your sex life was truly yours as there were hardly any inputs from greater society.

    So back then the sexes were truly equal on a sexual level.

    But with the media promoting the "James Bond Love 'Em And Leave 'Em" Attitude back in the 50s and 60s.

    That is very threatening to women you see. Especially women who are still in traditional roles.

    Suddenly the males are being freed by the media, and encouraged to pursue sexual freedoms. Yet the females are the bottom of the heap in the James Bond Films (they get killed and dumped several times a movie.)

    Candace Bushnell's Girl Power is the opposite of being one of the "Love 'Em and Leave 'Em" Girls. In her world, she says "Ok sex is the new game....I'm going to have complete control of it...I'm going to say when how where and why"

    See....You can't have women flock back to traditional roles in a society where a James Bond type character is held in high-esteem and cheered on.

    It messes up the balance.

    ReplyDelete
  49. So in a society in which women are in traditional roles...

    Homemakers, Wives, Mothers, Virgins until Marriage

    Then if the Culture/Media promotes a vision of the male as Playboy...the male as a sexual being....and this vision is cheered on by the men themselves.

    Then women are just objects to serve the men. And a Traditional Role ends up being a cage.

    But if James Bond is frowned upon as a Rake who manipulates womens weaknesses and emotions and is not a father.....

    Then suddenly Men are Fathers and Husbands. And women are Wives and Mothers.

    Then it is equal again.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Men have always glamorised the Bond types, see the Greek myths. Christian society set about to curb that, however, the process was never complete and men still got up to shenanigans, especially if they had means. I don’t claim that everything in the past was perfect, however, girl power has no realistic socially constructive basis and is just about women doing whatever they want, and claiming justification.

    ReplyDelete
  51. As for Bond, alas for the rest of us, he doesn't have to manipulate anyone, women throw themselves at him. Clocking off now.

    ReplyDelete
  52. "Christian society set about to curb that, however, the process was never complete and men still got up to shenanigans, especially if they had means."

    Yes, but they never had movies and all of society glamorizing and encouraging it. Heck Catherine the Great got up to some Naughty Naughty LOL!!! I wouldn't want to be a man in her court!


    "I don’t claim that everything in the past was perfect, however, girl power has no realistic socially constructive basis and is just about women doing whatever they want, and claiming justification."

    I think I have explained Girl Power--why it exists, and how it came to exist.
    It may not be 'rational' from a purely logical, and biological standpoint. But women are emotion driven creatures who react to men to begin with. Every time I post on Mark's site I do not start out with logic, I start with an emotion or gut feeling and move towards logic. It's annoying and frustrating for you men, but it's just how I operate.

    And finally......

    I think I'm right :) haha And I think you men aren't willing to give up what you guys have gained since 1900. And until you guys are willing to give up what you gained...Or at Least Acknowledge That Candace was an After Effect of Male Sexual Freedom and not a Singularity....

    Then you can all bitch to high heaven on all the blogs...but you will fail to see the entire picture.

    Goodnight Jessie!!! :) :)

    ReplyDelete
  53. Is it just me or are all Anonymous the same person? 0_0

    ReplyDelete
  54. "I think I'm right :) haha And I think you men aren't willing to give up what you guys have gained since 1900."

    I go to a church which is very anti-porn. One thing you and your colleagues aren’t willing to give up or learn is when to keep your head down or shut up.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous #1, I am a woman, professional, career woman, a successful writer who hasn't a single sex scene in my work, I am not "emotionally driven" but driven by intelligence and calm and emotions are guideposts, not springboards....Your comments evidence bitterness, unhappiness and tortured relationships with men. Candace Bushnell is a lightweight, highly insecure and crass. As a single woman, I find her and her show/books totally embarassing. Though I have had my heart broken, I still love and admire men, and quite frankly, I find that they are FAR better writers than most women!

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.