“Patriarchy Chicken”, a microcosm of feminism.

From Instapundit

HIGHER EDUCATION BUBBLE UPDATE: Professor says she plays “chicken” with men while walking to empower women. “The idea of patriarchy chicken is as follows: by refusing to move out of the way to avoid collision with men going in the opposite direction, women are somehow empowering themselves.”

It might be more aptly renamed “presuming on chivalry.” But then, “feminists” do that a lot.

The irony is that the feminist is displaying her unshakable faith in the goodness of men here, even strangers on the street.  This is very similar to Dalrock’s Law of Feminism, although instead of pleading with men to come to her rescue she is banking on men’s goodwill even as she accuses them of oppressing her.

See Also:

This entry was posted in Chivalry, Dalrock’s Law of Feminism, Instapundit, Ugly Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to “Patriarchy Chicken”, a microcosm of feminism.

  1. feministhater says:

    This is satire, right?

    [D: If it is, feminists are mistakenly taking it seriously.]

  2. Junkyard Dawg says:

    That actually happened to me a number of years ago. I was in a park where there is a wide walking path. People walking toward one another from opposite directions usually each moved to the right (like on the roads) to let one another pass. I saw a woman coming my way and moved all the way to the right, to the edge of the path. I soon saw that she had no intention of moving and she also was all the way over on the right (in her case, the left), and for sure, I was not going to step off onto the grass to let her pass, nor move to the center of the path – why should I?

    I didn’t know how I was going to handle it, as she was almost face to face and I didn’t have much time to consider. But just seconds before, I stopped, put on a big spontaneous smile and said, “Good morning, how are you?” (We were now both standing still, face-to-face, about a foot apart.) This apparently was unexpected and she seemed to come to her senses, said, “OK,” and then moved over and kept going, and I resumed walking.

    [D: Brilliant response.]

  3. Anon says:

    Once again :

    ‘Feminism’, far from helping women, has instead exposed the full extent of female inferiority (moral, intellectual, economic, parental, spousal, physical, civic, spiritual) far more visibly than was ever possible before ‘feminism’.

    Traditional customs benefited women more than men, since they kept women out of situations where their true limits would be quickly exposed.

  4. Anon says:

    The human brain, both male and female, has evolved to place the well-being of women above the well-being of men.

    Biologically, this made sense for thousands of years, as women are the scarcer reproductive resource. Only now, in the modern era, is this mentality obsolete, as women have departed too far from the sole reason that the human brain is hardwired this way.

  5. Cindy says:

    I hope men everywhere read this and decide never to give way again. I’d love to see videos if the encounters. Would make my day.

  6. Anonymous Reader says:

    “Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn’t.”

    – Mark Twain

  7. Oscar says:

    I’ve been to uncivilized places where men openly beat their women, and everyone (including the women) just looks, shrugs (as if to say, “serves her right”), and keeps walking.

    That’s the “progress” towards which feminism is pushing us.

  8. Her feminist demo has a class element, which she doesn’t see from inside her bubble. Ten minutes in a US inner city would enlighten her. She would be seen as dissing guys, something they can’t allow if they wish to survive on the streets.

    From another perspective, she should beware of meeting guys like this:

  9. Pingback: The perfect response to Patriarchy Chicken. | Dalrock

  10. ray says:

    Not satire. I’ve had this happen on a handful of occasions — but only in America. Hmm I wonder why.

    I can see the game shaping up from a few yards out, including the determined half-smirk on the faces of the onrushing Empowered Ones. They keep coming, they get bumped. Heck most of them outweigh me by fifty pounds anyway.

    Then of course, yawn, they express rage and shock that I ‘called them’ on their sick little gyno-game. :O)

    Add this as Reason Ten Thousand that I don’t live there anymore.

  11. ray says:

    TeamFem challenges Tucker Carlson to a game of Patriarchy Chicken —


    No apologies. No permitting Team Fem to shame him into stammering, little-boy retractions. No tossing other men under the BitchBus to save himself. No groveling. (Hello Churchianity!) Instead Tucker challenges back, hey come on ahead then, and we will air it.

    Loathe Fox, but starting to warm up to Tucker. Mayhap at last he’s shaking off those ole MSNBC blues. Might make a decent warrior after all.

  12. Pingback: “Patriarchy Chicken”, a microcosm of feminism. | Reaction Times

  13. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Junkyard Dawg, an easy way to handle it: If you see her coming, simple stop, stare down at your cell phone, maybe turn your back toward her.

    She’ll come up to you, and you’ll be standing there. If she says, “Excuse me!” you can say, “Go around.”

    You’ll come off as passive aggressive, maybe even rude, but you can’t be charged with assault. Which might be a problem if you walk into her.

  14. squid_hunt says:

    It either looks like they’ve pushed too far with this crap and finally men are standing up to them or they have gotten too bold and started picking on the wrong people and it keeps blowing up in their faces. It’s like the antifa morons who were fine rioting in Seattle, but when they showed up in Alabama, they got unmasked and arrested. Losers.

  15. Someone might take issue with Dalrock’s LoF, saying that the chicken-playing woman is not leaning on men’s goodwill—they’re oppressors, after all—but that both man and woman are victims of an emergent phenomenon, the men unknowing dupes.

    In other words, men aren’t conscious oppressors, but passive beneficiaries of privilege. Playing chicken is merely an attempt to wake up the sheeple, male (by forcing to the side and startling) or female (by showing “it can be done.”)

    The gnawing suspicion is that Wait a minute, these guys are just…dudes. “Why should masculinity get so much play? He watches Netflix too.” The temptation is to think that the Emperor has no clothes, and to constantly provoke to test that.

    Society-wide shit test, indeed.

    Weird events to come. This is not a stable equilibrium.

  16. Opus says:

    The University of Southampton commenced life in 1862 – is thus a “red-brick” – and is ranked 20th in the 130 Universities of Great Britain. The Uni has over fifty teaching staff in its Department of History and Dr Riley who acquired her Doctorate in 2013 is neither a Professor, Reader, or Senior Lecturer being a lowly ‘lecturer’. She must thus be aged about thirty, is from her photograph plain, and is obviously desperate for attention. My uncalled for but free advice to Charlotte Lydia (middle-class first names) is ‘drop the marxist, feminist, anti-British rhetoric which your Uni page makes all too clear and get a makeover – start with a visit to the hairdresser!’. Also get a real job.

    My Mother was born in Southampton (pop 250,000).

  17. PappaRooster says:

    On my last visit to NYC I noticed that the women all seemed to assume that I would get out of their way, as they walked straight ahead, often without paying attention who was in front of them. So entitled! I decided to play my own game of “Patriarch Chicken” – I walked straight ahead with my gaze straight ahead in the distance, to see if these women would flinch or not. Most did, sometimes after I came to a stop immediately in front of them with an impassive look on my face (I didn’t think of giving a cheerful greeting). A couple ran right into me and nearly got knocked on their butt as as consequence. I admit to being a bit pleased with their shrieks of indignation.

  18. ray says:

    squid hunt —

    Like fantasy females asskicking in Marvel etc., the Patriarchy Chicken Dance is calculated to further empower females, and disempower/emasculate males. The only patriarchy around America is the target planted firmly on the male, especially the disobedient or uppity male. In the hive-mind gynarchy of Amerikoo, the P.C. Dance is another expression of artificed dominance, spiritual and material rebellion against God’s created order, His fatherhood, His masculinity.

    So, an attack on Father. Little wonder King Jeshua sees modern America as another golden calf. Except the U.S. cows are the idols themselves. ;O)

    Mere sins are one thing, rebellion another. Jeshua is not happy, to Him the P.C. Dance mocks Father, and the goodness of His creation. It ought not be tolerated by His servants on Earth, nor considered a small thing, no more than the assumption by U.S. females that slapping or assaulting a male is part of their protected rights, no wait . . . part of their collective responsibility!

    On the plus side, big bonus when they rile heaven up for me. One less thing to do.

  19. Gosh…I would love to see the “professor” playing her “Chicken Game” in Morocco!
    Of course nowadays she would not have to go all the way to Morocco……Sweden would do just fine!
    If she is on a Bus in Stockholm…..she better check her privilege and give her seat to any vibrant
    fellow that wants to manspread (and NOT count on beta-male chivalry to help her)!

  20. pdwalker says:

    I’d “obliviously” deck her.

  21. Oscar says:

    @ pdwalker

    I’d “obliviously” deck her.

    That’s exactly the reaction that I was talking about in my post yesterday at 12:04.

    I’ve been to uncivilized places where men openly beat their women, and everyone (including the women) just looks, shrugs (as if to say, “serves her right”), and keeps walking.

    That’s the “progress” towards which feminism is pushing us.

    Western men – because of the influence of Christianity – are the gentlest men on Earth with respect to women and children.

    But Christianity is losing influence in the West. As Westerners reject their Christian roots, eventually, Western men will begin to ask themselves, “why the hell am I deferring to these bitches?” And, eventually, Western men will begin to treat their women more like Muslims and/or Africans do.

    And then, feminists will have the uncivilized word for which they’ve been screeching for decades.

  22. Caligula says:

    “I walked straight ahead with my gaze straight ahead in the distance, to see if these women would flinch or not.” The key is eye contact: don’t offer it, and she can’t tell if you’ve seen her. This also works with drivers- given ’em eye contact and they can be confident you’ll be the one to avoid a collision.

    “If she says, “Excuse me!” you can say, “Go around.” You might be better off saying absolutely nothing. After all, how does she know you’re not hearing-impaired? A friendly greeting might be best in some situations, but the bottom line remains that you don’t owe anyone anything, and especially you don’t owe a reply to a peremptory challenge.

    As they say, “You have the right to remain silent.” And sometimes it’s best to use it. For remaining silent (and immobile, if you wish) is not an action but the absence of action. It may not be polite or friendly, but it also can’t be cast as aggression (let alone assault).

  23. Otto says:

    I’d “obliviously” deck her.

    This is exactly what they want: for the male to respond with anger and/or aggression. You would be playing into their hand. She would love to play the victim, even if she isn’t.

    The other responses are passive aggressive, but that’s the game she is playing also.

  24. feeriker says:

    And then, feminists will have the uncivilized word for which they’ve been screeching for decades

    Bring it on! Harsh (i.e., potentially lethal) medicine is the only cure for some diseases.

  25. feeriker says:

    This is exactly what they want: for the male to respond with anger and/or aggression. You would be playing into their hand. She would love to play the victim, even if she isn’t.

    OTOH, it only takes one incident of sticking a fork into an electrical socket or teasing an aggressive dog to realize that the outcome is painful, damaging, and unpleasant enough to never even think about doing it again. Por ejemplo, I seriously doubt that the stupid bitch in the link below will ever again even dream of pulling a dipshitty stunt like this:


  26. Jack Russell says:

    I wonder is that woman who jumped in the jag pen was a feminist trying to outdo her friends. See my cat is bigger and better than yours. Wonder if the zoo is going to be sued.

  27. sestamibi says:

    Many years ago I offered my well-used car for sale (well over 100K miles on it–running OK but not in the best condition, but I was up front about everything). I asked $300 but was willing to take $200. A young feminist came by to look at it and offered $200 and not a penny more. She was going to put this sexist pig in his place. I countered at $260, but she wouldn’t budge. I came down to $225 and walked. She called me a day later and agreed to $225 and I sold it to her for that price.

    I was livid at her bargaining position. I had other offers and didn’t need her crap. Men need to follow this principle in all transactions, both business and romantic: the party that cares least wins.

  28. dvdivx says:

    Watching the video thesickmanofeuropecom posted and ignoring race is cucked suicide.

  29. Pingback: For Everyone’s Sake: Win | Things that We have Heard and Known

  30. Pingback: She’s teaching her daughters to play patriarchy chicken. | Dalrock

Comments are closed.