Around the world, American women tend to be thought of as "spoiled". Not all, of course, but it's a commonly heard stereotype. A subtype of this is the infamous "princess".
Well, here is my brazen, politically incorrect, but I think, fair and honest essay on "princesses." It is only slightly tongue-in-cheek. Ha! Well, if I am way out on any points, please let me know.
It's clear to me that many more women than men do not accept their faults (denial) when these are pointed out to them. I believe this is due in part to the general acculturation of women in this society as "princesses" -- effectively placed on social pedestals. And, it's even worse for very attractive women. "Doc Love" (an anonymity web handle) in "http://www.askmen.com" points out that "'10s' are twice as much maintenance as '8s'". In my own experience I have seen this over and over as true. One attractive woman bluntly told me that she was high maintenance. She almost added, .....“and proud of it."
Men will more readily be honest, own up to, and accept their limitations and/or faults. There are exceptions, of course, but they are not the general rule.
An operational definition of a "princess" includes the following:
1. They don't have to apologize or admit when they are in the wrong. They have difficulty understanding the concept of "personal responsibility."
2. They feel they don't have to ask permission for anything. They have a poor sense of respectful boundaries and "stepping on other people's toes."
3. Their timetable and agenda takes precedence over others' schedules. In group situations, allowances of various kinds have to be made for them. For example, a group of friends' get-together time/date has to be changed to accommodate them, even though everyone else can make the original or customary time and date.
4. They expect (and truly believe they deserve) "high maintenance" (unusual purchases, extravagant gifts, fancy restaurants, great vacation trips, anything expensive, etc.) from any man that they allow regular sex with, i.e., husbands, boy friends, lovers. Sharing some expenses and going "Dutch" are insulting, abhorrent concepts. You are in the wrong for even mentioning it. They will extract a high price from any love-struck schmuck who is willing to "worship at her feet."
5. Princesses usually are the more attractive women. However, some plain, average-looking women will also exhibit this behavior, if they are clever and crafty, and think they can get away with it. They usually fail with men who have more awareness of this power struggle and game.
Having said the above, very unfortunately many affluent men accept this pathetic situation and deserve to shoulder some blame. They want an attractive, sexy woman in their lives and are willing to pay for it. This does not diminish the supply of "princesses." The current economic malaise does not help either. Hence, there are common expressions like "trophy wife," "bartered love," "golddigger" and “marriage of convenience.”
6. Princesses don't do "favors" (unless there is something in it for them.)
There are some quality women who will not stoop to this deplorable behavior (these are also called “married” and otherwise “unavailable” women.) However, there are so many of the "princess" kind that one can not help but frequently observe this in everyday life. I think this is a huge social problem for the decent, honest, working men out there (the majority) -- especially the ones who get enmeshed with one of these in a marriage with children, and then later get devastated by the male hostile divorce courts.
The typical feminist response is to defend women and blame men. There's some truth to this. But, I think if one is going to "blame" anyone, then our psycho-sociology and Anglo culture need to be blamed.
Interestingly, at one time in history (over 50 years ago) being a "princess" was a valid thing. Men made the big money and had the "real" careers. Dying in childbirth was a real threat to women. Effective birth control did not exist. Legal rights were limited for women. They couldn't vote. Women stayed home and took care of the home and kiddies. Society looked down on women with careers. If a woman did have a career or job, she made a lot less money than the men in those same jobs.
The last historical media expression of this was the Cleaver family in the 1950s TV series "Leave It to Beaver." June Cleaver went to the beauty parlor and played Bridge once a week with other housewife women friends. Otherwise, she kept up the home, intervened in her sons' lives as needed, and Ward was respected as the head of the family by both sons and wife. His decisions were final.
World War II was the beginning of the end for these kinds of sex-role separations and discriminatory cultural values. There was such a great shortage of male labor that women worked on the Home front in many tough jobs that only men had before, i.e. "Rosy the Riveter." Your parents and mine were the last generation of all that. Being a "princess" was valid at one time -- no question about it. A good man took care of his "princess." She usually deserved it -- back then.
It's just that today, in 2007, being a "princess" is no longer valid. "Princesses" still want to be treated like their mothers or grandmothers were treated. Women today don't live anything like their grandmothers. The world is much better for them in every conceivable way. In many ways, it's worse for men. Women have risen up; the average man has been lowered. Sorry, ladies -- wealthy white males like Bill Gates, Clinton, Donald Trump and famous rich movie stars, like Kevin Costner and Brad Pitt, who get all the goodies and trophy wives are the exceedingly rare exceptions to the rule.
A good book on this subject is Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man, By Susan Faludi, William Morrow and Company, 1999, 662 pages. It has a good insightful review of events since WWII. Here is an excerpt from a review:
"What's ailing men? In her fat new investigation of male malaise, feminist Susan Faludi finds the culprit in the culture."
Comments