Tag Archives: starbucks

Gender-Based Double Standards That Need To Stay Double Standards

Posted on by
979

The typical first questions a woman wants to know about her friend’s new boo-thang involves a rundown of his resume. What he is (degrees, titles) seem to outweigh who he is (loving, supportive, etc). Questions like, “How does he treat you?” or “What do you feel when you’re with him?” don’t matter for some women.

Men, however, don’t do this. Maybe they focus more on other superficial things like a woman’s appearance, but her resume never factors into if he’ll date her or how his friend’s will judge her.

This quote is from “But He Works at Starbucks!” — a recent Clutch Magazine piece where the author (Patrice J. Williams) expresses a bit of angst about her new love interest’s relatively underwhelming occupation and explains that the source of much of her angst is her worrying about what her girlfriends will think about him. (Sound familiar?)

You’re probably expecting me to use these next couple paragraphs to tell another “Boy meets Girl” story where I’d talk about how short-sighted, faulty, and hypocritical it is for women to judge a man’s sexual/relationship worthiness on his status (and somehow find a way to fill my weekly “unprompted shade at Deltas” quota).

But, while I think this particular instance is an example of a woman, the author’s homegirl, being more concerned with appearances than ambition – like a few said in the comments there, a Starbucks manager could be pulling in 45-50 a year with full benefits and a chance to rise up the ladder at one of the country’s biggest companies – I don’t think it’s wrong for women to consider potential future earning power when deciding who to invite to meet Miss Sweet n Low. (Btw, “Miss Sweet n Low” is the name that I think all single women should give their vaginas. When married? “The Harvest Festival.”)

Yeah, as the author points out, it’s a double standard, but it’s a double standard that I don’t want made “equal.” I actually don’t mind the fact that we’re judged on something we have a bit of control over. Plus, let them (women) continue to worry about vague and boring shit like whether he can be a protector and provider for the children she’s never going to actually have because she waited until her 53rd birthday to get hitched, and let us (men) continue to fret about fun shit like “If we lose all of our furniture in a flood, is her booty big enough to serve as a temporary coffee table until we get the check from State Farm?”

The Starbucks situation aside, can you think of any other double standards that need to stay exactly how they are? Are you completely cool with the fact that homegirls can have adult sleepovers where they’re taking shots and snapping each other’s thongs while guys can even see movies together unless they star Paul Walker? Are you ok with the fact that “woman with a bunch of useless and stupid shit in her house” = “normal” while “man with a bunch of useless and stupid shit in his house” = “Todd Palin”?

The carpet is yours.

—The Champ

If you haven’t purchased the paperback or the $9.99 Kindle version of “Your Degrees Wont Keep You Warm at Night: The Very Smart Brothas Guide to Dating, Mating, andFighting Crime” yet, what the hell is stopping you? (No, seriously. Tell us and we’ll send Liz’s boobs to fix it)

raised right

Posted on by
149

For many of us, the concept of chivalry died years ago, neglected so long that it ended up gaunt, emaciated, and barely recognizable, starving to death outside of a KFC because no one could spare him the big piece of chicken.

Well, the champ is here to say that we’re wrong. Chivalry isn’t dead or even dying…just in need of a bit of a makeover. An update. A reboot. A few minor tweaks and adjustments to help it combat the depraved mindsets attempting to eradicate it.

Without further ado, here’s a partial version of the champs simple guide to 21st century chivalry…what it entails and encompasses and how to make sure it always gets that elusive big piece.

1. If a woman is within 15-20 feet and approaching a door at the same time a man is, the man must always attempt to open it and let her walk through first, even if he’s coming from an awkward angle. If the women is within 20-40 feet and walking at a pace which insures that she’ll be at the same door he’s about to enter within 7-10 seconds, he can walk through the door first, but he must hold the door for her.

This is pretty non-negotiable. Plus, as an added bonus, there’s no better way of getting a really, really good clear booty peek…women always seem to switch and jiggle the hips a little extra whenever a door’s being held open for them. I think it’s some form of a primitive mating mechanism actually, with an evolutionary correlation between held doors, jiggled hips, and ovaries, but I really have no idea.

***Also, even though the man isn’t holding the door just so the woman can say “thanks” , the man does reserve the right to mutter “bitch” “witch” under his breath if the act isn’t acknowledged at all.***

2. A man can never use too many “pleases”….except in the bedroom, where it should be given the condiment treatment: only used with light sprinkles

The bedroom in itself is a paradox where the common rules of chivalry don’t exist. For instance, saying “please” during a sexual act is a bit tricky because “please” accompanies a request. Depending on his disposition, body language, and penis size, “please” could be interpreted as “a playful request lightening the mood”, “a considerate lover”, or “an annoyingly desperate dude who should just stfu and be happy that his cornball ass is getting some .

There’s basically no in-between, no gray area with this, exactly why he needs to be absolutely sure about the nature of their sexual relationship before he continues with the “pleases”. Usually in these situations, a slight nudge or forceful grab of the neck eye contact is all that’s needed to get his point across, whatever it happens to be.

3. Men should always pay for the first three dates

It doesn’t matter if the guy’s a grad student working at Starbucks dating a newly hired cpa making 80k a year, if they’re dating, the man should always cover at least the first three dates. This is a universal rule that actually benefits both parties. If she’s really into him, she won’t mind the fact that the first couple of dates have been at Borders, the cheese dog stand at the arts festival, and the sample soup counter at giant eagle. If she’s feeling him, but does mind the limited spending dates, then thats all the proof he needs that she’s an evil, money grubbing hobbyhorse not the chick for him. Its that simple. If things are going well, by number four she should offer to pay or at least provide the setting and the man should accept her offer.

lastly…

4. Don’t bullsh-t the chivalry Gods.

men, don’t break your neck to open doors for every Esther Baxter or Zoe Saldana you see but refuse to give up your seat for the slightly homely chick with the eclectic teeth on the train carrying 90 textbooks

on the same token, women should always acknowledge a chivarious act. It could be a smile or a “thank you” or a slight head nod or head an “accidental” cleavage peak…anything as long as it lets the guy know that his efforts haven’t been in vain. If you see a guy doing the doorstop thing for you, the very least you can do is make an effort to sped up your walk so it doesn’t seem like he’s standing there waiting for the seasons to change in the time it takes your inconsiderate ass to get to the door.

there you go, young grasshoppers. go on now and make the champ proud

—the champ