The day chivalry killed chivalry.

Back in January of 2016, Mr. Gabe Jones of Those Catholic Men declared in Women Don’t Deserve Combat that chivalry died on Dec 3, 2015:

December 3, 2015 ought to be remembered as the date that any remaining vestiges of our country’s collective sense of chivalry died a tragic death. It was on this day that Secretary of Defense Ash Carter announced his decision to require combat positions in every branch of the United States military – including the Marine Corps – be opened to women. Despite being one of the most significant news items in recent memory, if you did not pay close attention to the world affairs during the past few weeks the announcement may have been lost in the commotion of the other issues in the news, such as the presidential campaign, ISIS, refugees and immigration, not to mention gun and racial issues. One more thump in the constant drumbeat of political correctness can easily be overlooked.

The great irony is that Secretary of Defense Ash Carter killed chivalry by holding the door open for women!  Like Sir Gawain, Sec. Def. Carter acted chivalrously and decided to let women decide for themselves.  Moreover, the only chivalrous response to women demanding to be allowed into combat is the only chivalrous response to anything a woman asks*.  As Laura Ashe explains in Love and chivalry in the Middle Ages (emphasis mine):

Malory’s ideal of chivalry has love at its heart: ‘thy quarrel must come of thy lady’, he says, ‘and such love I call virtuous love’. Each knight is to fight for the sake of his lady; with his victories he earns her love, and defends her honour. He is absolutely loyal to her and will follow her every command, whatever happens – whether she sends him on an impossible quest, banishes him from her company, or stands accused of some terrible crime, in desperate need of his help.

Sec. Def. Carter responded to women demanding entry into combat with a chivalrous Yes, M’lady!  It would have been unchivalrous to say no, as Jones himself clearly understands from the very title of his piece.  Jones makes it a point to clarify that he would never “denounce” women serving in the military in any capacity, as he is in awe of their gallant knightly virtues:

But first, a clarification is necessary. Nothing written here is intended to detract from the courage and patriotism of the women who have already served, are serving, and will serve in combat roles. Nor should what follows be taken as a denunciation of women serving in the military in any capacity. We owe these women a debt of gratitude for their sacrifice. Anyone – male or female – who has volunteered to serve our country deserves our respect and admiration. That being said, we can and should question the philosophy of allowing women into combat and whether or not it’s a good idea.

Just like Sec. Def. Carter, Jones can’t bring himself to say no to feminist demands.  All he can do is protest that women are too strong and virtuous to go into combat.  He closes the piece with a call to pedestalize women, including the very feminists who are demanding to serve in combat.  Like Doug Phillips and the men of the CBMW, Jones pretends that feminists aren’t really demanding to go into combat, but that mysterious unseen cowardly men must be somehow forcing ladylike women to usurp the roles of men (emphasis mine):

War is brutal. The front lines of combat are a disgusting, abhorrent, crude, and destructive place. This may sound very old fashioned or even chauvinistic to a non-Catholic, but it’s not. It’s chivalrous because the simple fact is that combat is no place for women. They deserve so much better. As men, we should protect and uphold the dignity of women, and one very important way we can do that is to raise our daughters to be strong, virtuous, and holy, with Mary as their ultimate role model. Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal, not shoved in a foxhole.

See Also: 

*There is one exception in the rules of courtly love. A lover who is ordered by his lady to stop loving her must not and should not assent.

This entry was posted in Chivalry, Courtly Love, Gratitude, Kickass Conservative Gals, Military, Sir Thomas Malory, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists, Weak men screwing feminism up. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to The day chivalry killed chivalry.

  1. feministhater says:

    Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal, not shoved in a foxhole.

    No. They don’t deserve shit.

  2. purge187 says:

    Political window-dressing and little else. If we ever got around to drafting women, many of them would “accidentally” get pregnant beforehand.

    Even so, I think women who are able-bodied should serve in some capacity, and if they refuse, they should be subject loss of freedom and loss of tuition funds the same way we are.

  3. Lost Patrol says:

    Did chivalry kill chivalry, or did it take it to a whole new level?

    No one gets drafted anymore but all men must still register. Women do not have to. In theory we can call up men involuntarily as needed but not women.

    As the program now stands every military role is open to women but they cannot be forced to serve at all. As commenters here have noted in the past, this is the essence of feminism as enabled by chivalry. Women may do anything they like, but do not have to do anything they don’t like.

  4. Hazelshade says:

    Mr. Gabe Jones: “December 3, 2015 ought to be remembered as the date that any remaining vestiges of our country’s collective sense of chivalry died a tragic death”

    If only that was true. What a blessing it would have been if Gabe had been right.

  5. 8 in the Gate says:

    Makes me wonder if men would continue to write articles like this if they were guaranteed that no woman would ever read it.

  6. Pingback: The day chivalry killed chivalry. | @the_arv

  7. feministhater says:

    Cognitive dissonance.

    They realise that they need men to keep the world running and to keep everyone safe. As men continue to walk away this creates a direct threat to their world view.

    However, women are now shown as being equal to or even better than men and as such should be able to serve in every capacity that men do. Thus it shouldn’t matter that men walk away as women can pick up the slack.

    We all know that this is a crock of shit and that women can’t, they simply can’t do it and men are actually required and thus needed to keep all of society afloat; but to say so is to say that ‘equality’ between the sexes doesn’t exist and thus they have created this ‘reach around’ to try and correct their cognitive dissonance.

    The only problem for them is that by saying this, they are really saying that men are useless but for their disposability. And due to this, men continue to walk away, causing the problem to become worse. Thus more ‘man up’ shaming but to little avail.

  8. Oscar says:

    Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal, not shoved in a foxhole.

    The appropriate response to anyone who demands what they “deserve” is…

    … then ask them; what have you earned?

  9. JB Harshaw says:

    Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal

    This isn’t merely “chivalry”… via the addition of the “deserves” it becomes blatant IDOLATRY.

  10. Paul says:

    “Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal”

    That’s the LAST thing they deserve, and is a sure way to kill any healthy husband-wife relationship. All women are sinners, some redeemed.

  11. Oscar says:

    OFF TOPIC: Men are better at being women than women are (continued).

    https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/14/biological-male-wins-womens-world-cycling-championship/

    A biological male who identifies as a transgender woman won a women’s world championship cycling event on Sunday.

    Rachel McKinnon, a professor at the College of Charleston, won the women’s sprint 35-39 age bracket at the 2018 UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships in Los Angeles.

    McKinnon, representing Canada, bested Carolien Van Herrikhuyzen of the Netherlands and American cyclist Jennifer Wagner to take home the gold.

    McKinnon celebrated the victory on Twitter, writing: “First transgender woman world champion…ever.”

    At some point, feminists are going to push back, and that’ll be all kinds of fun to watch.

  12. Oscar says:

    Does chivalry apply to trannies?

  13. Sharkly says:

    Does chivalry apply to trannies?
    It must. I believe I’ve seen them opening the doors for themselves.

  14. JRob says:

    Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal

    If so, then he who does the placing deserves to enjoy the consequent effect. See: The Law of Gravity.

  15. Scott says:

    Excellent work.

  16. Scott says:

    However, women are now shown as being equal to or even better than men and as such should be able to serve in every capacity that men do. Thus it shouldn’t matter that men walk away as women can pick up the slack.

    The way this little bit of irrationality will continue is by pointing out that while, yes, we have opened all combat roles to women, the “good ole boy” network is tough to crack.

    Because it exists even if we cannot see it or quantify it in any meaningful way.

  17. Pingback: The day chivalry killed chivalry. | Reaction Times

  18. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    But women are warriors because they give birth. TV actress Vanessa Marcil says so on her Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/Bo9W6sWA2y0/?taken-by=vanessamarcilmlovesk

    This is where I grew my son! Inside of my guts … because women are fucking warriors. Celebrating women again tonight. Our strong minds our strong bodies & our beautifully strong, loyal and vulnerable hearts. …

    Female social media is so full of self-adulation. The exhaust their limited vocabularies seeking words to express their own awesomeness.

  19. Cloudbuster says:

    Mr. Gabe Jones needs a good ass-kicking.

  20. Burner Prime says:

    This is all theater, LARPing, and dress-up. When the real war starts, women will quickly fall to the rear, demand all males “man-up and fight the Commies – no room for shameful cowards”. You will be met with incredulous disbelief if you assert: “…but, but whamans are super strong and should have the right to fight at the front”. You’ll be laughed out of the room and the whamens will shamelessly deny ever having asserted they were capable of fighting a bloody, brutal war. They will have it both ways. Millions of white knights (including many here), fearful of being called a coward and disappointing the Fair Ladies will tally-ho to the front to save Her Lady’s honor, getting gutted by an enraged Chi Com.

  21. earl says:

    This is one of those things where he should have not add the last sentence because it undermined a good message.

    As men, we should protect and uphold the dignity of women, and one very important way we can do that is to raise our daughters to be strong, virtuous, and holy, with Mary as their ultimate role model.

    See this I agree with…if there is one thing a lot of women are lacking is virtue that comes from fearing the Lord. It does take away from their dignity. But once he went ‘pedestal’…well he kicked the chair out from under his argument. Jesus is on this preverbal pedestal but he doesn’t say that because he doesn’t want to cause badfeelz™ in women.

  22. earl says:

    Female social media is so full of self-adulation.

    Especially since she had to justify putting up her 1,001st bikini selfie. She must have not had enough attention that day.

  23. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Especially since she had to justify putting up her 1,001st bikini selfie. She must have not had enough attention that day.

    Today is her 50th birthday, so she might be having an emotional crisis.

    It might also be an old selfie. Or heavily filtered.

  24. earl says:

    There’s probably no might…it seems most Western women have a couple emotional crisises a day now. Like wondering if they can still bring about male thirst on instatwitbook.

  25. Cane Caldo says:

    @Scott

    The way this little bit of irrationality will continue is by pointing out that while, yes, we have opened all combat roles to women, the “good ole boy” network is tough to crack.

    Excellent insight.

  26. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Burner Prime: Millions of white knights (including many here), fearful of being called a coward and disappointing the Fair Ladies will tally-ho to the front to save Her Lady’s honor,

    How long can that last, seeing that Lady Fairs are increasingly in short supply?

    White Knights love sacrificing for Fair Ladies (who, by definition, are young, beautiful, and gracious). How much longer will today’s White Knights sacrifice for obese, clown-haired, foul-mouthed harridans?

  27. earl says:

    In our gynocracy the only thing worse than world hunger, ISIS, threat of nuclear war, and George Soros is a woman ever feeling badfeelz™ even once. Abortion, no-fault, and male suicide is still ok though.

  28. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Young woman gets arrested for attacking an old man: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/protester-accosting-man-struck/

    The old man was holding a pro-Kavanaugh sign, and the young woman attacked him. Unclear whether she was arrested, or merely led away by police.

    She should be charged with a hate crime. Had a young man physically assaulted an old woman with an anti-Kavanaugh sign, he’d be facing jail time.

  29. Frank K says:

    How much longer will today’s White Knights sacrifice for obese, clown-haired, foul-mouthed harridans?

    As long as they have even the slimmest of hopes of being rewarded with sex for their gallantry, they will rush to the rescue of those she-beasts.

  30. Spike says:

    Enlightened Betas are going to be swallowing Red Pills in droves when they realise that their upbringing compels them to pedestalise women, but when they get up close and personal…. there’s noting worth putting on a pedestal.
    Virginity? No. Chastity? No. Femininity? No. Honesty? No. Financial prudence? No. Add to that, for the tough military chick, 4 intact limbs? No. PTSD – free? No.

    Wow. What a catch!

  31. ingracious says:

    The thing that frustrates me about all this ‘women in the military’ stuff in general is that there’s never any acknowledgement given to the fact that it is fundamentally, in every respect, sub-optimal.

    The military has to spend its limited resources (money, materials, spots for training) in order to train soldiers, and when it comes to women they even have to spend additional resources just on accomodating them specifically – female uniforms, female medical supplies, psychologists for when they break down, whatever.

    And what does the military actually receive for all those investments? A mediocre-at-best soldier who is also likely to be spoiled, ungrateful, and to have a negative effect on the morale of the men around her who have to pick up all the slack.

    It should be a simple, obvious fact: When you have the choice either of training a dog to be an attack dog or of training a cat to be an attack dog – that is, you have both choices available to you with no outside constraints – then every single cent that you spend on training a cat when you could have trained a dog is a cent pointlessly squandered, because one acts as a money-multiplier and the other as a money-sink.

    People who support women in the military shouldn’t just be looked at as being spineless, they should be looked as being complete idiots. They support wasting and squandering resources for zero tangible benefit – helping to either weaken the military to the point it can’t fulfill its actual role, or helping to make it so wasteful and inefficient that there isn’t enough money to prop it up, or both. It’s the height of stupidity.

  32. earl says:

    Enlightened Betas are going to be swallowing Red Pills in droves when they realise that their upbringing compels them to pedestalise women, but when they get up close and personal…. there’s noting worth putting on a pedestal.

    They were never meant to be put on the pedestal in the first place. God is supposed to be there.

  33. feeriker says:

    Women deserve to be placed on a pedestal, not shoved in a foxhole.

    No. They don’t deserve shit.

    How about burial in a foxhole?

  34. @Sharkly 😂😂😂😂😂 Nice one!

  35. Pingback: Feminism is the parasitic rider chivalry longs for. | Dalrock

  36. Pingback: An earnest defense of John MacArthur’s chivalry. | Dalrock

  37. Pingback: Reconciling old and new conservative views. | Dalrock

Comments are closed.