When Knights surrender their sword – the problem of effeminate men


For myself at least, I would not understand it that way, because I don’t consider feminine to be the opposite of masculine. The sexes are complementary, not opposites.


But at the end of the day, if you simply mean to say ‘unmanly’ you’d SAY ‘unmanly’ or ‘unmasculine’ or some such.

‘Effeminate’ is very well known to mean more than ‘unmanly’, it literally means ‘being like a woman’ (hence the very obvious ‘-femin-’ part, as in ‘feminine’).

To describe someone who is a coward as being ‘like a woman’ is to imply exactly that cowardice is something more typical of, and appropriate to, women rather than men.


Erm, what makes you think women protect each other?


Men weren’t in the habit of protecting every woman in the olden days.
Women were judged worthy of protection by social class, perceived virtuousness, desirability to the protector, race, among other reasons.
You have here a perfect storm of women desirous of an acting career (some of whom worked very hard to even get an audition), lecherous men in power, Hollywood being a moral cesspool, and a decaying culture in the larger culture.
Nothing that happens in Hollywood should be a surprise to anyone over 18.


I don’t think much has changed in this regard.


Cf my post above…

I realize things have changed since the 1960s, but prior to that my experience was that, not all but many if not most, women were generally more protective, primarily of their own family and then of other women and children.


The main problem is not liberalism or men being too girly or whatever. It’s not something you can blame on one particular issue.

Rape has been going on for a long time, even when pre marital sex was sooooooo scandalous, even when men were running to open doors for women. A man who would punch a nose for his woman would probably not care about the black peasant girl being raped or molested. It’s time to put down the rose tinted glasses.

People in power are just too giddy with greed, they don’t face consequences. When someone is in that position, they do unbelievable things. It doesn’t have to be about rape, it could be about other stuff as well. It’s about them being able to give into the temptation of sin because they’re powerful enough to not face terrible consequences. Sure, the view that women are sex objects or ornaments has a part to play, but that’s been going on for ages, even in very conservative cultures so it’s silly to blame it on a political movement we hate.


Lea I think you have hit the nail on the head, the problem of the powerful giving into temptation and sinning against the weak has probably been a problem for all time. There seems to be a real human tendency to see these things as a new modern evil that would never have happened in some bygone era over half a century ago.


This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.