53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
http://gawker.com/rich-man-buys-house-next-to-ex-wife-erects-giant-middl-1465406839
A Michigan man has reportedly gone to Internet-ready lengths in order to troll his ex-wife with a daily reminder of his feelings towards her.
According to a person claiming to be the ex-wife's daughter, the crazy-wealthy Bloomfield Hills man, identified only as "Alan," allegedly purchased the house next door to his ex, and proceeded to move in with his daughter Tiffany.
Rich Man Buys House Next to Ex-Wife, Erects Giant Middle Finger Outside
SEXPAND
He then went a step further and purchased an expensive bronze statue of a middle finger, which he placed on the back porch and aimed at his ex-wife's house.
As if that weren't quite enough passive aggression, Alan ensured the statue was visible 24/7 by shining a spotlight on it after dark.
"Alan and Tiffany are the best neighbors," tweeted Lenka Tuohy, "but ew who does that lololol."
Apparently the statue has had the unintended effect of pissing Tuohy off as well.
"[I]ts hard for me to enjoy my baths now because my fav tub is in my moms bathroom which faces out towards tif and alans house," she wrote, adding a frowny-face emoticon.
When a friend pointed out that Alan's gesture was making him "look like an idiot," Tuohy concurred: "Like lol someone's not over my momma!"
Update 6:45 p.m.: Detroit sports writer Jeff Moss has identified the owner of the house above as Alan Markovitz, a local legend who owns three Detroit strip clubs and authored a book entitled Topless Prophet: The True Story of America's Most Successful Gentleman's Club Entrepreneur (which is in the process of being turned into a TV series for Cinemax).
A previous version of this article referred to the person identified as Tiffany as Markovitz's "girlfriend," but according to Deadline Detroit, she is his daughter from a previous relationship.
Here is the relevant paragraph:
Markovitz has a 17-year-old daughter from a previous relationship who lives with him. He was married for two years to a woman he met at a friend's birthday party at an Auburn Hills restaurant. But they recently divorced. He said his wife, a native of Slovakia, was cheating on him with someone he knew. She moved in with the guy two days after moving out of the house.
"He broke the Man Code. He’s a total freakin’ donkey-cave,” Markovitz says. “Real men don’t do that to another guy."
Wow, just wow.
39188
Post by: Bullockist
I read that last week and thought it was pure awesome. I cannot think of a better monument to un-amicable divorce.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
The solution is obvious.
Buy the house the other side of Markowitz'z house and erect a huge statue of an arsehole.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Wow...just, wow.
57811
Post by: Jehan-reznor
 Kilkrazy wrote:The solution is obvious.
Buy the house the other side of Markowitz'z house and erect a huge statue of an arsehole.
Easier is just to erect a reflecting wall! 
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
That's manly as feth.
I approve.
58613
Post by: -Shrike-
That's hilarious! How much money does he have? 
14070
Post by: SagesStone
That's one way to screw her out of money in a divorce. 
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
What an insufferable ass one would be if they have to show that much public hatred towards someone.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
I actually find this hilariously awesome as I detest cheating in relationships. Feth her, this guy is my new hero.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
241
Post by: Ahtman
 Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
Then you talk to the person and bring up your issues, not run around behind their back like a schoolchild hiding a report card. If that doesn't work you break it off and move on like an adult.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Yeah, now that you phrased it like that I can see the concern but still the cheating could have been an important transition for the person breaking up and finding a new, healthier relationship.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
People aren't like clothes and accessories; just because you don't enjoy being with them anymore you can't just throw them away like garbage. On another note, cheating on one's partner is kinda like treason. If you can't be trusted with being loyal to one person, how can you be loyal to a whole nation?
38150
Post by: Dark Apostle 666
As regards cheating, Ahtman says it better than I could - if you're not satisfied, fix it or end it, don't play someone along because you can't be bothered to tell them.
Anyway, the statue thing is pretty funny, but it seems a bit excessive - what's wrong with just firebombing their car? (Yes, that's a joke) 
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
 Admiral Valerian wrote: Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
People aren't like clothes and accessories; just because you don't enjoy being with them anymore you can't just throw them away like garbage.
I disagree, people get divorced, break up, etc all the time prolonging an unhealthy relationship that is beyond repair is not good.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Cheesecat wrote: Admiral Valerian wrote: Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
People aren't like clothes and accessories; just because you don't enjoy being with them anymore you can't just throw them away like garbage.
I disagree, people get divorced, break up, etc all the time prolonging an unhealthy relationship that is beyond repair is not good.
Then why get married at all in the first place? And I refuse to debate divorce; let's stick to cheating on one's partner. Which is still wrong, BTW.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Because you're in love with someone, you're in an arranged marriage setup by your family, for political reasons, concerns about status, financial reasons, tradition, preserving a culture, etc.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
I'll agree that cheating is wrong in the sense it would be more mature to breakup/divorce than to have sex behind someones back, unless it's an open relationship as that's not really cheating as it's agreed that you can have sex with other people and is therefore not breaking the rules of that
relationship.
519
Post by: Noble713
 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Alan Markovitz, a local legend who owns three Detroit strip clubs and authored a book entitled Topless Prophet: The True Story of America's Most Successful Gentleman's Club Entrepreneur (which is in the process of being turned into a TV series for Cinemax).
Markovitz has a 17-year-old daughter from a previous relationship who lives with him. He was married for two years to a woman he met at a friend's birthday party at an Auburn Hills restaurant. But they recently divorced. He said his wife, a native of Slovakia, was cheating on him with someone he knew. She moved in with the guy two days after moving out of the house.
" He broke the Man Code. He’s a total freakin’ donkey-cave,” Markovitz says. “Real men don’t do that to another guy."
I'll agree that a guy friend banging your wife is a breach of Man Code. That's the sort of thing you do to people you either don't respect, don't like, or don't know. THAT SAID....
This dude was running three strip clubs, and felt like enough of a subject matter expert to write a book on it....but couldn't keep his hot Eastern European wife in check?
Don't ever post things like this on Dakka.
Reds8n
Get rid of that stupid statue, go read some Iceberg Slim, and up your skill level in the bedroom. Then snag a younger, hotter wife than your ex and show her off at every opportunity.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Why? I think this thread is taking an interesting route, as a discussion about people's morals when it comes to relationships could be intriguing.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Cheesecat wrote:
Why? I think this thread is taking an interesting route, as a discussion about people's morals when it comes to relationships could be intriguing.
Yeah, and it could also lead to flaming.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Noble713 while I don't care if you use it, but I don't think it's the wisest idea to be posting an image with the word "[ see forum posting rules]" in it as the mods tend to frown on that type of language.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Admiral Valerian wrote: Cheesecat wrote:
Why? I think this thread is taking an interesting route, as a discussion about people's morals when it comes to relationships could be intriguing.
Yeah, and it could also lead to flaming.
Who's being hostile? I don't feel like anyone has said anything harsh to me do you feel like me or other posters have been mean to you in this thread?
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
I think this post is a new low for off topic. You seriously need a reevaluation of life if you think cheating is okay. And by the way, this message has been reworded multiple times to be as nice as possible. Other responses I wanted to give would likely get me banned for life.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
This is why you shouldn't cheat. There are some people out there who'd snap and kill you (or worse) if you do.
38860
Post by: MrDwhitey
Yeah, cheating isn't justifiable in a marriage you freely entered, and I seriously question anyone who does it/thinks it's ok.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
If your relationship is at that point either talk to your partner and attempt to work things out, or thank them and go your separate ways.
Cheating is never ok.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Finally! Sense!
52833
Post by: Alexzandvar
Poes law is in full effect here, I cannot believe you are not just trolling Cheesecat
Holy mother of feth
This seems to be just one of those things were it just has to happen to you to understand how horrible it is.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
You're joking right?
If you no longer want to be with someone then break up with them, don't cheat on them.
72490
Post by: gossipmeng
If he has the money..... then I approve of this trolling.
16286
Post by: Necroshea
 timetowaste85 wrote: Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
I think this post is a new low for off topic. You seriously need a reevaluation of life if you think cheating is okay. And by the way, this message has been reworded multiple times to be as nice as possible. Other responses I wanted to give would likely get me banned for life.
In complete agreement. It takes a seriously warped mind to ever think going behind a spouses back for something like sex could ever be anything but an indicator that you are a terrible person.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
A bit personal, but hey, it works as an example: my paternal grandfather cheated on my grandmother, and basically tore apart my father's childhood. And he always made sure me and my sister knew about that. So don't tell me cheating is fine in my face, because if you do, then I don't care if I get charged with assault/suspended from college I am going to punch you in the face.
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Admiral Valerian wrote:
This is why you shouldn't cheat. There are some people out there who'd snap and kill you (or worse) if you do.
Posting anime memes is an excellent way to fastrack yourself to half the forums ignore list.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
I think this has officially ceased to be a discussion, and it goes down in the books as "cheesecat is just wrong". When it's "one vs all", it's time to reevaluate. Or he's trolling to see who he can rile up. If it's trolling, good work-you succeeded well. If you're serious, seek counseling.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
 Corpsesarefun wrote: Admiral Valerian wrote:
This is why you shouldn't cheat. There are some people out there who'd snap and kill you (or worse) if you do.
Posting anime memes is an excellent way to fastrack yourself to half the forums ignore list.
Actually that one is not off the mark. I might not be homicidal over the issue, but there are people out there who might.
53839
Post by: Shredsmore
Cheesecat wrote: but still the cheating could have been an important transition for the person breaking up and finding a new, healthier relationship.
wat
7653
Post by: Corpsesarefun
Admiral Valerian wrote:
Actually that one is not off the mark. I might not be homicidal over the issue, but there are people out there who might.
A notion that could be easily expressed in text, as you just did.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Corpsesarefun wrote: Admiral Valerian wrote:
Actually that one is not off the mark. I might not be homicidal over the issue, but there are people out there who might.
A notion that could be easily expressed in text, as you just did.
I concede the point.
34390
Post by: whembly
Now THAT is an Alpha man's response!
Bravo.
1206
Post by: Easy E
I feel sorry for Tiffany and Touhy.
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
It's ok, they can always change their stripperific names later 
62229
Post by: Minx
Their working names are Tiffani and Touhi as we've learned here. 
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Probably not-it's quite an awesome response to a cheating a-hole. I would have used the b-word, but it doesn't matter what gender does the cheating, so it becomes a-hole.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Vindictiveness is hardly manly.
34390
Post by: whembly
Nope.
I think moving next door is dumb... but, that statue? He can move on to other things now knowing that his ex will see that every day.
Then, he needs to get all of his worker girls to party at his house.
But, then again. I have ZERO sympathy for the cheater. Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slinking away to obsurity after the divorce isn't manly either.
Cheating spouse should be publically humiliate IMO and branded as the proverbial scarlet letter.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
 whembly wrote:
Nope.
I think moving next door is dumb... but, that statue? He can move on to other things now knowing that his ex will see that every day.
Then, he needs to get all of his worker girls to party at his house.
But, then again. I have ZERO sympathy for the cheater.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slinking away to obsurity after the divorce isn't manly either.
Cheating spouse should be publically humiliate IMO and branded as the proverbial scarlet letter.
Whembly, I feel like you and I should be best friends.
34390
Post by: whembly
I have that affect on everyone it seems.
I've learned the hard way and swallowed that "red pill".
It's time that we all knock each other off that "pedestal" and fething talking to one another.
19370
Post by: daedalus
whembly wrote:
It's time that we all knock each other off that "pedestal" and fething talking to one another.
But it's so much better to hide in my ivory tower of pseudo-intellectualism and quip about fallacies, real or imagined.
Seriously though. I agree with this. The BS here gets too thick sometimes*.
* Every time.
16387
Post by: Manchu
whembly wrote:Slinking away to obsurity after the divorce isn't manly either.
Obscurity? How can one be obscure in relation to one's own life? This seems to imply a mindset where the man defines himself around his ex-wife's life rather than his own. The mean-spirited version of that is called vindictiveness.
39188
Post by: Bullockist
timetowaste85 wrote: Cheesecat wrote:I don't see what's wrong with cheating if someone's doesn't feel satisfied with their partner, why should someone remain committed to a person they don't enjoy being with anymore?
I think this post is a new low for off topic. You seriously need a reevaluation of life if you think cheating is okay. And by the way, this message has been reworded multiple times to be as nice as possible. Other responses I wanted to give would likely get me banned for life.
Agreed. If people don't want to be with someone they should break up with them. Blaming someone else for your cheating is pathetic , I mean It's their fault you are running around behind their back and lying to them? 
In short, cheating is a sad ego boost, people should just man up and say I want out. If you cannot communicate with your partner on why you are feeling dissatisfied I have no idea why you are in it in the first place.
Other than than cheaters could just be sad individuals who think that lying and sneaking around on someone makes them "smarter"
I also have feth all patience for cheating.
34390
Post by: whembly
Manchu wrote: whembly wrote:Slinking away to obsurity after the divorce isn't manly either.
Obscurity? How can one be obscure in relation to one's own life? This seems to imply a mindset where the man defines himself around his ex-wife's life rather than his own. The mean-spirited version of that is called vindictiveness.
Nope... It gives actual consequences to the cheating spouse.
In this case this is justified... If you want to call it vindictive, by all means go ahead... Zero feths given here.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
whembly wrote:
Cheating spouse should be publically humiliate IMO and branded as the proverbial scarlet letter.
I most definitely agree.
16387
Post by: Manchu
whembly wrote:Manchu wrote: whembly wrote:Slinking away to obsurity after the divorce isn't manly either.
Obscurity? How can one be obscure in relation to one's own life? This seems to imply a mindset where the man defines himself around his ex-wife's life rather than his own. The mean-spirited version of that is called vindictiveness.
Nope... It gives actual consequences to the cheating spouse.
In this case this is justified... If you want to call it vindictive, by all means go ahead... Zero feths given here.
Or ... be a man, move on with your life.
34390
Post by: whembly
Manchu wrote: whembly wrote:Manchu wrote: whembly wrote:Slinking away to obsurity after the divorce isn't manly either.
Obscurity? How can one be obscure in relation to one's own life? This seems to imply a mindset where the man defines himself around his ex-wife's life rather than his own. The mean-spirited version of that is called vindictiveness.
Nope... It gives actual consequences to the cheating spouse.
In this case this is justified... If you want to call it vindictive, by all means go ahead... Zero feths given here.
Or ... be a man, move on with your life.
So being a "man" means that you have no recourse to address the cheating wife?
Best response is something like what the op article state and then move on....
IMO, you don't ever let such transgression go unanswered.
A). You throw her out.
B). If she doesn't care... Then you "announce" to the whole world what she did... She'll suffer a "loss" in the eyes of her circle of friends and family... And for a socially active chick... That's painful.
C). THEN you move on and party hardy!!
D). Zero. feths. Given
221
Post by: Frazzled
If he owns strip joints I'm sure she's not the only one who was cheating.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Frazzled wrote:If he owns strip joints I'm sure she's not the only one who was cheating.
That's very possible.... But we don't really know eh?
39188
Post by: Bullockist
Frazzled wrote:If he owns strip joints I'm sure she's not the only one who was cheating.
Frazz come on , surely he has to check whether his strippers have the appropriate sensual attributes. *
*this may or may not be facetious depending on how you wish to take it.
221
Post by: Frazzled
whembly wrote: Frazzled wrote:If he owns strip joints I'm sure she's not the only one who was cheating.
That's very possible.... But we don't really know eh?
Seriously? I think we do...
91
Post by: Hordini
Cheating is wrong. Divorces in which the two parties continue to treat each other like garbage and do passive aggressive or abusive crap to each other, especially if they have children, is disgusting. Talking bad about the other parent in front of the children and trying to get the children to take sides is horrendous. Whatever the other adult did, it's between the two adults, and making the children suffer through it is messed up.
23445
Post by: Necro
He is not crazy wealthy unless he buys every house around her property and and spams his statement.
It's a good start but I question his dedication given his funds.
5478
Post by: Panic
yeah,
I found a photo of the statue.
...
Panic...
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
 Panic wrote:yeah,
I found a photo of the statue.
...
Panic...
30287
Post by: Bromsy
I'm not sure when it became the definition of manliness to calmly accept slights and abuse, but I'm guessing it's at most a hundred years or so. Throughout the vast majority of human history, taking gak from your peers without qualms was called being a coward. I'm not saying it's a smart or better way, but the historical way of 'being a man' about this would be to get a hammer and do some skull bludgeoning.
70365
Post by: Gentleman_Jellyfish
 Bromsy wrote:
I'm not sure when it became the definition of manliness to calmly accept slights and abuse, but I'm guessing it's at most a hundred years or so. Throughout the vast majority of human history, taking gak from your peers without qualms was called being a coward. I'm not saying it's a smart or better way, but the historical way of 'being a man' about this would be to get a hammer and do some skull bludgeoning.
We need to bring back honor dueling and allow it to apply over the internet!
Also the statue is lit 24/7
34390
Post by: whembly
Bromsy wrote:
I'm not sure when it became the definition of manliness to calmly accept slights and abuse, but I'm guessing it's at most a hundred years or so. Throughout the vast majority of human history, taking gak from your peers without qualms was called being a coward. I'm not saying it's a smart or better way, but the historical way of 'being a man' about this would be to get a hammer and do some skull bludgeoning.
eh..."being a man" from manchu's perspective (I'm guessing) is striving to be "chivalrous".
The problem with chivalry today is that most modern women don't respond to this anymore.
And yes, a lighted statue is epic.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Chivalry is dead, unfortunately.
91
Post by: Hordini
It's only as dead as you allow it to be.
34390
Post by: whembly
Takes two to tango.
15447
Post by: rubiksnoob
A few points:
1) The title led me to believe something. . . more obscene than a middle finger was erected.
2) This sounds exactly like the kind of stunt that a slowed meathead that owns a chain of stripclubs would consider clever. It smacks of desperation for attention, not "manliness".
3) Yeah cheating isn't nice, but it happens. People meet other people. It's not right but get the feth over it and move on like a grown person. Wallowing in betrayal and resentment is for children.
91
Post by: Hordini
One of the most important parts of doing the right thing is doing the right thing even if others do not.
16387
Post by: Manchu
Bromsy wrote:taking gak from your peers without qualms was called being a coward
Putting aside your bizarre view that men have been troglodytes until the last century, the topic to hand is not "taking gak without qualms" but rather dedicating some part of your life to being nasty about a relationship that's over. That's called being petty, vindictive, pathetic, and creepy among other things. One thing it cannot be called, however, is manly.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Hordini wrote:
One of the most important parts of doing the right thing is doing the right thing even if others do not.
Being chivalrous is not "doing the right thing".
The opposite is chivalry is...what? Treating chicks as equals? Automatically Appended Next Post: Manchu wrote: Bromsy wrote:taking gak from your peers without qualms was called being a coward
Putting aside your bizarre view that men have been troglodytes until the last century, the topic to hand is not "taking gak without qualms" but rather dedicating some part of your life to being nasty about a relationship that's over. That's called being petty, vindictive, pathetic, and creepy among other things. One thing it cannot be called, however, is manly.
*sigh*
Okay... how 'bout it's donkey-cave-ish?
You do know that chicks digs donkey-caves... right?
91
Post by: Hordini
whembly wrote: Hordini wrote:
One of the most important parts of doing the right thing is doing the right thing even if others do not.
Being chivalrous is not "doing the right thing".
The opposite is chivalry is...what? Treating chicks as equals?
So behaving like a gentleman, treating others with respect, and helping those in need is not doing the right thing? I would argue that by treating women with respect, you must inherently treat them as equals. To treat them as anything less would not be chivalrous. Unless you're using the most restrictive, medieval definition of chivalry, with dueling and all that crap. But I don't think that's what most people mean when they say something like "chivalry is dead."
I would say the opposite of chivalry, in the modern sense is being rude, boorish, and selfish, and not treating others with respect.
58873
Post by: BobtheInquisitor
I don't think what you said is the actual meaning of "chivalry".
43066
Post by: feeder
This guy is clearly five flavours of fethhead and likely deserved this. He's one very small step above a pimp for emperor's sake.
Around here, guys who drop terms like "Man Code" without irony are d-bags of the highest calibre and not to be taken seriously. We leave that behind in high school with fist bumps instead of handshakes and calling everyone "gay".
34390
Post by: whembly
Hordini wrote:
So behaving like a gentleman, treating others with respect, and helping those in need is not doing the right thing? I would argue that by treating women with respect, you must inherently treat them as equals. To treat them as anything less would not be chivalrous. Unless you're using the most restrictive, medieval definition of chivalry, with dueling and all that crap. But I don't think that's what most people mean when they say something like "chivalry is dead."
I would say the opposite of chivalry, in the modern sense is being rude, boorish, and selfish, and not treating others with respect.
*sigh* We're getting off topic here as I think we're arguing semantics here.
Treating women with respect and as equal is NOT chivlary. I do that every day to every chick I encounter and I resent that you're insinuating that I treat the opposite sex harshly. But, that ain't chivalry.
When chicks complain about the lack of chivalry or that "chivalry is dead", I want to point out that chivalry was a system, one that imposed obligations of behavior on women and girls as well as on men.
Modern women (mainly feminist?) decided that chivalrous acts by men were merely acts of paternalism to a weaker sex... and hated it.
Case in point: when a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind.
He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain.
Also implicit in chivalry is an unspoken awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Which is the whole fething rationale for chivalry in the first place.
The modern men are rational critters... when chivalry isn’t getting the appropriate response from chicks... it's no wonder that it's a dying social construct. Men are asking “What’s in it for me?”, and increasingly the answer is “Not much”.
/rant off
Again... this is NOT me saying that I treat women like gak. My female friends/family, I may do chivalrous acts... but I don't think of it in that way. I do it because I want to... not because I expect something back (the whole fething idea of chivalry).
Chicks that I don't know? I'm a cold mother fether. Which strangely... attracts them.
91
Post by: Hordini
It's a somewhat complex term with a variety of definitions that have shifted over time. What do you think it means? Automatically Appended Next Post: whembly wrote: Hordini wrote:
So behaving like a gentleman, treating others with respect, and helping those in need is not doing the right thing? I would argue that by treating women with respect, you must inherently treat them as equals. To treat them as anything less would not be chivalrous. Unless you're using the most restrictive, medieval definition of chivalry, with dueling and all that crap. But I don't think that's what most people mean when they say something like "chivalry is dead."
I would say the opposite of chivalry, in the modern sense is being rude, boorish, and selfish, and not treating others with respect.
*sigh* We're getting off topic here as I think we're arguing semantics here.
Treating women with respect and as equal is NOT chivlary. I do that every day to every chick I encounter and I resent that you're insinuating that I treat the opposite sex harshly. But, that ain't chivalry.
When chicks complain about the lack of chivalry or that "chivalry is dead", I want to point out that chivalry was a system, one that imposed obligations of behavior on women and girls as well as on men.
Modern women (mainly feminist?) decided that chivalrous acts by men were merely acts of paternalism to a weaker sex... and hated it.
Case in point: when a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind.
He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain.
Also implicit in chivalry is an unspoken awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Which is the whole fething rationale for chivalry in the first place.
The modern men are rational critters... when chivalry isn’t getting the appropriate response from chicks... it's no wonder that it's a dying social construct. Men are asking “What’s in it for me?”, and increasingly the answer is “Not much”.
/rant off
Again... this is NOT me saying that I treat women like gak. My female friends/family, I may do chivalrous acts... but I don't think of it in that way. I do it because I want to... not because I expect something back (the whole fething idea of chivalry).
Chicks that I don't know? I'm a cold mother fether. Which strangely... attracts them.
Sorry Whembly, I wasn't trying to insinuate anything about you personally. While medieval chivalry is somewhat complex, I would argue that at leas the ideal version doesn't necessarily hinge on the expectation of getting something back for doing it, but rather the expectation of doing your duty due to your position in society.
While I understand the argument of some feminists in this regard, I would also argue that a man can hold a door open for a woman or assist her in carrying something for its own sake (that is, out of kindness), rather than under the guise of a pact that implies certain expectations. Which is more what I'm referring to, because when I hear complaints of chivalry being dead, it's most commonly linked with some situation involving a man being rude or disrespectful to a woman. But I recognize that use of the word isn't strictly the same thing as the medieval code of honor from which it originates.
30287
Post by: Bromsy
Hordini wrote:
It's a somewhat complex term with a variety of definitions that have shifted over time. What do you think it means?
While I understand the argument of some feminists in this regard, I would also argue that a man can hold a door open for a woman or assist her in carrying something for its own sake (that is, out of kindness), rather than under the guise of a pact that implies certain expectations. Which is more what I'm referring to, because when I hear complaints of chivalry being dead, it's most commonly linked with some situation involving a man being rude or disrespectful to a woman. But I recognize that use of the word isn't strictly the same thing as the medieval code of honor from which it originates.
I think you are looking for the term courtesy. That covers everything you seem to be espousing without getting into all the other unrelated aspects of chivalry like service, military training, challenges, christian faithfulness, and horsemanship.
feeder wrote:This guy is clearly five flavours of fethhead and likely deserved this. He's one very small step above a pimp for emperor's sake.
Around here, guys who drop terms like "Man Code" without irony are d-bags of the highest calibre and not to be taken seriously. We leave that behind in high school with fist bumps instead of handshakes and calling everyone "gay".
How dare you denigrate the noble profession of strip club ownership. Uncouth, sir.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Having read several people's response to my posts about cheating, I have reevaluated my position and agree with several posters that the responsible thing to do in an unhealthy relationship is to breakup/divorce rather than to cheat, I apologize for any offense I caused. 
39768
Post by: Captain Fantastic
Sometimes I wonder if my wife or lover cheating on me would even upset me. The bonds I create with women are so thin and superficial that I can't imagine really caring too much if they were broken. The few relationships I've had were all ended with me telling them that I wasn't interested in them anymore, maybe with some cold remarks thrown in for effect.
I don't think cheating is right though. If you really don't want to be with them, just tell them that, before you end up "accidentally" making the decision to frig someone else. I think breaking someone's trust by cheating is one of the worst things you can do.
91
Post by: Hordini
Bromsy wrote: Hordini wrote:
It's a somewhat complex term with a variety of definitions that have shifted over time. What do you think it means?
While I understand the argument of some feminists in this regard, I would also argue that a man can hold a door open for a woman or assist her in carrying something for its own sake (that is, out of kindness), rather than under the guise of a pact that implies certain expectations. Which is more what I'm referring to, because when I hear complaints of chivalry being dead, it's most commonly linked with some situation involving a man being rude or disrespectful to a woman. But I recognize that use of the word isn't strictly the same thing as the medieval code of honor from which it originates.
I think you are looking for the term courtesy. That covers everything you seem to be espousing without getting into all the other unrelated aspects of chivalry like service, military training, challenges, christian faithfulness, and horsemanship.
Nah, chivalry is what I was looking for, I was just using a looser, non-medieval definition. If we're tacking all that onto it, then of course it's been dead for centuries and feminists would never have had any cause to complain about it.
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
I think you should open the door for anyone close behind you regardless of their gender, it's just a kind thing to do.
66552
Post by: Admiral Valerian
Cheesecat wrote:I think you should open the door for anyone close behind you regardless of their gender, it's just a kind thing to do.
It's the polite thing to do.
91
Post by: Hordini
My thoughts exactly.
80986
Post by: Stuebi
No we dont. Stripppers are not the same thing as prostitutes and a stripper isnt automatically easy to get, just like someone that works in that business isnt autoamtically fething around everywhere.
OT:
Whembly, have a highfive. I agree with everything you said. The dude seriously is my hero, and with payback delivered he can move on to date an actually decent human being instead of that cow.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
feeder wrote:This guy is clearly five flavours of fethhead and likely deserved this. He's one very small step above a pimp for emperor's sake.
Around here, guys who drop terms like "Man Code" without irony are d-bags of the highest calibre and not to be taken seriously. We leave that behind in high school with fist bumps instead of handshakes and calling everyone "gay".
My boss is in his mid-thirties and still fist bumps. It's more akin to how he grew up, not how he "couldn't get out of high school". And honestly, if we did all strive to abide by the man-code, things would be a lot better. I do believe in the man-code. I don't steal my friends girls, current or ex, as I feel it's a serious breach of friendship. Got me out of a tight spot in college too-my friend liked a girl, she and I liked each other but I played dumb because he was crazy about her. He never got her and I transferred colleges, found out she was the quiet campus slut (slept with just about anyone) and had STDs. Bullet dodged, due to man-code. You laugh, I feel it's a decent code to live by. Is this guy a saint? Probably not. Almost definitely not. But his wife definitely cheated, and he isn't a guarantee. If he cheated too, he's as bad as she is and I support her building a bronzed statue of a plumber mooning him to stare at all day. I believe in equality. He dun fethed up too? Nail him to the same board. My zero tolerance policy on cheating is just that: zero tolerance. Automatically Appended Next Post: Cheesecat wrote:Having read several people's response to my posts about cheating, I have reevaluated my position and agree with several posters that the responsible thing to do in an unhealthy relationship is to breakup/divorce rather than to cheat, I apologize for any offense I caused.
Might sound like tough love, but it sounds like a victory here. It takes a big man to apologize, instead of just telling us all to "feth off". You're one of us, whether you like it or not.
36184
Post by: Alfndrate
I seriously hope there were other reasons you transferred colleges other than wanting to get away from the village bicycle.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Oh, God, total misunderstanding! Lol. I transferred for classes, had nothing to do with her or my friend. I had used up all the English courses at my first college (was a 2-year) and moved on to the next to get my Bachelors.
34390
Post by: whembly
Hordini wrote: Sorry Whembly, I wasn't trying to insinuate anything about you personally.
No worries dude. Automatically Appended Next Post: Bromsy wrote: Hordini wrote: It's a somewhat complex term with a variety of definitions that have shifted over time. What do you think it means? While I understand the argument of some feminists in this regard, I would also argue that a man can hold a door open for a woman or assist her in carrying something for its own sake (that is, out of kindness), rather than under the guise of a pact that implies certain expectations. Which is more what I'm referring to, because when I hear complaints of chivalry being dead, it's most commonly linked with some situation involving a man being rude or disrespectful to a woman. But I recognize that use of the word isn't strictly the same thing as the medieval code of honor from which it originates.
I think you are looking for the term courtesy. That covers everything you seem to be espousing without getting into all the other unrelated aspects of chivalry like service, military training, challenges, christian faithfulness, and horsemanship.
Exactly. Courtesy is absolutely the right thing to do. Automatically Appended Next Post: Cheesecat wrote:Having read several people's response to my posts about cheating, I have reevaluated my position and agree with several posters that the responsible thing to do in an unhealthy relationship is to breakup/divorce rather than to cheat, I apologize for any offense I caused.
'Tis okay... it's great that you've reevaluated your stance. Automatically Appended Next Post: Stuebi wrote: OT: Whembly, have a highfive. I agree with everything you said. The dude seriously is my hero, and with payback delivered he can move on to date an actually decent human being instead of that cow.
:highfive back: I still think moving next door to your ex is dumb... but, if you're going to do that... man... that statue is epic.
1206
Post by: Easy E
If this act is considered to be manly instead of petty; I think the definition of masculinity has gotten pretty fethed up.
I thought men were suppose to adhere to a stoic tradition and not let themselves be defined by the actions of another person, but instead be defined by their own actions and deeds.
The actions of the former husband are repulsive and juvenile. Two very unattrative qualities no matter who it is. Fantasizing about vengence is one thing, acting on those base impulses is uncivilized and counterproductive.
20901
Post by: Luke_Prowler
Is there any actual proof that the woman cheated on the man aside from the man's word?
80986
Post by: Stuebi
 Easy E wrote:If this act is considered to be manly instead of petty; I think the definition of masculinity has gotten pretty fethed up.
I thought men were suppose to adhere to a stoic tradition and not let themselves be defined by the actions of another person, but instead be defined by their own actions and deeds.
The actions of the former husband are repulsive and juvenile. Two very unattrative qualities no matter who it is. Fantasizing about vengence is one thing, acting on those base impulses is uncivilized and counterproductive.
I think everyone defines "being a man" differently. Also, I think its much less an issue of "being a REAL man" and more different people having different values, this isnt gender exclusive. And I personally value people getting called out for their BS, and thus maybe keeping them from doing stuff like that in the future. I also firmly beleive in Karma. If you kick people hard enough, they might just come around and bite your ass in the future.
I mean: "I behaved like a total D-Bag and it had consequences!" Cry me a fething river.
 Luke_Prowler wrote:Is there any actual proof that the woman cheated on the man aside from the man's word?
She did not deny it (yet) and appearantly moved in with her lover. IF she comes around denying it tough, this would be an entirely different kind of issue. I mean, that statue doesnt look like it was cheap.
1206
Post by: Easy E
Stuebi wrote:
If what I am seeing here is a "value" then I would argue that we have no worthwhile "values".
16387
Post by: Manchu
Yeah, what is hard about seeing something petty for what it is?
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Manchu wrote:Yeah, what is hard about seeing something petty for what it is?
Because it's an updated scarlet letter that we can all have a good chuckle over?
16387
Post by: Manchu
Please go read The Scarlet Letter.
1206
Post by: Easy E
timetowaste85 wrote:Manchu wrote:Yeah, what is hard about seeing something petty for what it is?
Because it's an updated scarlet letter that we can all have a good chuckle over?
In today's day and age we really don't need a Scarlet Letter.
Here I thought the Puritans were long gone. Foolish me.
80986
Post by: Stuebi
@ Easy E
You should edit that quote from me above, im pretty sure it should be the other way around.
And I guess im gonna agree to disagree here, since he could've buildt a 50 foot sign made from diamonds that read:
"Up yours."
And I would still find it great. So thats that.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
I have, Manchu, it came with the degree. I am allowed to have a bit of fun with this though. It's part of my "charm". At least that's what the doctors say before they make sure I give myself a nice big hug in my warm, white sweater.
16387
Post by: Manchu
hahaohwow.jpg Okay, carry on justifying pathetic vindictive behavior somehow on the basis of Hawthorne. Now you're making more sense.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Bromsy wrote:
I'm not sure when it became the definition of manliness to calmly accept slights and abuse, but I'm guessing it's at most a hundred years or so. Throughout the vast majority of human history, taking gak from your peers without qualms was called being a coward. I'm not saying it's a smart or better way, but the historical way of 'being a man' about this would be to get a hammer and do some skull bludgeoning.
At one time a vindictive wife would wait until her husband was asleep, then stab a knitting needle through his eyes.
37231
Post by: d-usa
So people think this guy is a "man"?
19370
Post by: daedalus
Do you think he is not a "man"?
Why?
69173
Post by: Dreadclaw69
Biologically, yes.
Otherwise the question as to whether he is a "man" depends on a lot of subjective definitions and ideals, as this thread has shown
70365
Post by: Gentleman_Jellyfish
Isn't the whole gender stereotype thing the talking point of this decade?
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Some (including myself) may feel this behaviour is childish and he should just let things go rather than continue to bring misery to his ex and have a constant reminder of his bad relationship out on his balcony isn't healthy mentally either.
46630
Post by: wowsmash
who care's its funny.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Cheesecat wrote:
Some (including myself) may feel this behaviour is childish and he should just let things go rather than continue to bring misery to his ex and have a constant reminder of his bad relationship out on his balcony isn't healthy mentally either.
Which part of that (or does all of it, I suppose) make one not a "man"?
34390
Post by: whembly
Kilkrazy wrote:
At one time a vindictive wife would wait until her husband was asleep, then stab a knitting needle through his eyes.
Or... you could do what this gal did:
That's a billboard at 4th Street and 7th Avenue, NY.
PS: Pretty sure it's a fake... but, awesome nonethanless.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Seems like I remember a bunch of people thinking videotaping two people having intercourse without both people's awareness and then using that to embarass or humiliate the persons involved was bad.
Not saying you were one of them.
...I wonder if she is not a "man".
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Now that is my kind of lady. Impressive.
16387
Post by: Manchu
No one is saying that only men should act with courtesy and maturity. The point was, pettiness is not manly.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Manchu wrote:No one is saying that only men should act with courtesy and maturity. The point was, pettiness is not manly.
So she's not being "manly".
34390
Post by: whembly
Manchu wrote:No one is saying that only men should act with courtesy and maturity. The point was, pettiness is not manly.
That's your opinion.
IF she truly cheated on her hubby and he remained faithful (which is hard to believe)... then it's justified.
At least he's not making a scene at her workplace, crashing family gatherings, etc...
Also, we would probably never know about this if the daughter hasn't posted pictures of that via social media.
37231
Post by: d-usa
If being petty and vindictive makes you "a man" and an "Alpha" like the last couple pages have indicated, then yes she is manly.
Of course is that is what it takes to be a man then I need to know where I can turn in my testicles because I don't want to be associated with my gender if that is the threshold for being an "alpha".
16387
Post by: Manchu
 daedalus wrote:Manchu wrote:No one is saying that only men should act with courtesy and maturity. The point was, pettiness is not manly.
So she's not being "manly".
No one is saying she ought to be. No, it's a conclusion.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
The guy is clearly a sore loser. A complete saddo, if you will.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Manchu wrote: daedalus wrote:Manchu wrote:No one is saying that only men should act with courtesy and maturity. The point was, pettiness is not manly.
So she's not being "manly".
No one is saying she ought to be.
Okay, so what I'm getting out of this is that no one is deriding either of them for not being manly, but merely arguing that the pettiness being displayed is NOT manly.
Is that a proper understanding?
37231
Post by: d-usa
daedalus wrote:Manchu wrote: daedalus wrote:Manchu wrote:No one is saying that only men should act with courtesy and maturity. The point was, pettiness is not manly.
So she's not being "manly".
No one is saying she ought to be.
Okay, so what I'm getting out of this is that no one is deriding either of them for not being manly, but merely arguing that the pettiness being displayed is NOT manly.
Is that a proper understanding?
My issue were the many statements that this action is what makes him a "man" and an "alpha".
16387
Post by: Manchu
daedalus wrote:no one is deriding either of them for not being manly, but merely arguing that the pettiness being displayed is NOT manly
Whembly said the vindictive actions of the guy at issue were those of an "Alpha Male." I do not dispute that manliness exists or that men should strive to be manly. I dispute that petty, vindictive behavior is manly. When it comes to women being vindictive, manliness is not at issue one way or the other. All the same, I am not excusing women who behave vindictively.
19370
Post by: daedalus
Then I am happy to report that my confusion has been resolved.
My observations are simply that it's just more petty human bs from petty humans. I did have a laugh about it though. Automatically Appended Next Post: Manchu wrote:Whembly said the vindictive actions of the guy at issue were those of an "Alpha Male." I do not dispute that manliness exists or that men should strive to be manly. I dispute that petty, vindictive behavior is manly. When it comes to women being vindictive, manliness is not at issue one way or the other.
Oh, I think that, from all I've heard about "Alpha Males", this is very much their kind of behavior. I also think it's sociopathic and shouldn't be anything that anyone strives for.
All the same, I am not excusing women who behave vindictively.
That was the part that I was confused about. Automatically Appended Next Post: Honestly, I kind of pity them that their worlds are so small that these are their biggest concerns.
34390
Post by: whembly
Manchu wrote: daedalus wrote:no one is deriding either of them for not being manly, but merely arguing that the pettiness being displayed is NOT manly
Whembly said the vindictive actions of the guy at issue were those of an "Alpha Male." I do not dispute that manliness exists or that men should strive to be manly. I dispute that petty, vindictive behavior is manly. When it comes to women being vindictive, manliness is not at issue one way or the other. All the same, I am not excusing women who behave vindictively.
o.O I'm not sure it's the "Alpha Male" response... I just said it was EPIC. Big difference. And I also dispute that it's petty and vindictive. It's righteous. I do say it's dumb to move next door to your ex...
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Well, the idea that this guy is not acting like a "man" (male adult) is because his behaviour is childish (behaviour that is considered immature) which would mean he's acting a like "boy" (a male child) not "man" as a "man" should not be doing such childish things, as a "man" is an adult and
adults are not supposed to act like kids.
9217
Post by: KingCracker
Obviously enough to push jokes past the limit just because. I giggled for a solid minute
28228
Post by: Cheesecat
Edited wrong thread. 
34390
Post by: whembly
Cheesecat wrote:Well, the idea that this guy is not acting like a "man" (male adult) is because his behaviour is childish (behaviour that is considered immature) which would mean he's acting a like "boy" (a male child) not "man" as a "man" should not be doing such childish things, as a "man" is an adult and
adults are not supposed to act like kids.
Um... if your wife cheats on you... what's the appropriate response?
Cheaters ought to be the pariah of society.
43066
Post by: feeder
timetowaste85 wrote:feeder wrote:This guy is clearly five flavours of fethhead and likely deserved this. He's one very small step above a pimp for emperor's sake.
Around here, guys who drop terms like "Man Code" without irony are d-bags of the highest calibre and not to be taken seriously. We leave that behind in high school with fist bumps instead of handshakes and calling everyone "gay".
My boss is in his mid-thirties and still fist bumps. It's more akin to how he grew up, not how he "couldn't get out of high school".
IDK, we all went around fist bumping in high school and then just... grew out of it.
timetowaste85 wrote:And honestly, if we did all strive to abide by the man-code, things would be a lot better. I do believe in the man-code. I don't steal my friends girls, current or ex, as I feel it's a serious breach of friendship.
Agreed, but surely one doesn't need a code to not feth his friend's wife.
Perhaps we are living different cultural norms, despite sharing a common language and designer branding.
16387
Post by: Manchu
whembly wrote:if your wife cheats on you... what's the appropriate response?
Work through it or divorce as amicably as possible and move on with your life.
80986
Post by: Stuebi
Manchu wrote: whembly wrote:if your wife cheats on you... what's the appropriate response?
Work through it or divorce as amicably as possible and move on with your life.
You could yes. Or you could tell her what a colossal worthless  she is by errecting a golden middlefinger in your garden.
Im not saying its the correct response, or the "Manly" response (This is idiotic btw, draggin this into a "what makes you a man"-discussion was stupid to begin with.), but I dont see why horrible people should _NOT_ get some backlash from being...horrible people. Granted, there are probably a bit more subtle ways to go about this, but he achieved what he wanted. Personally, I wouldnt give two feths about people deeming it "childish". It probably is by normal standards, but I still think its freaking awesome.
Kilkrazy wrote:The guy is clearly a sore loser. A complete saddo, if you will.
Absolutely! He lost a cheating wife and had some fun flipping her off with a golden Middle Finger. Give him a few months, maybe a year, and when the Lady cheats on her new guy, they can move in together and build a second one out of platinum!
|
|
