Now this is the FCB podcast network. You just listen to yourself presents. I'm just saying with Davis. Daily Wire commenter Matt Walsh is in hot water again for recent comments on the expectations of romantic relationships. In a social media post, Walsh said, why should the man play the traditionally masculine role of paying for the meals if the woman is not going to play the traditionally feminine role in return. Naturally, many are offended by his comments, but not me. I think most upset people are filtering as comments through the lens of misogyny they have already placed on him. But I understand exactly what Walsh is saying. I say it to women often myself. Walsh isn't saying men pay so women put out, And I don't even think he's defining what a feminine role might be. What he is suggesting is that, regardless of how we individually express our gender roles, we do indeed have roles. These roles are uniquely designed. They are puzzle pieces, and when placed together properly, they restore a full picture of relationship. The modern progressive movement has created a generation of women who expect men to fulfill their desires without being men. They see romantic relationships as transactional. This creates an atmosphere of selfishness in which the relationship is seen as a commodity rather than an experience. The pain for meals thing is simply the analogy whiles she chose to explain a bigger concept. We have the instinct to ask men to pay for dates, meals, et cetera, because it is a small, subtle signal that a man might be a provider, and also that he is valuing his time with a woman. And that's great. But what does a woman signal and how does she do it? A woman signals, again subtly, this is not a paint by numbers thing. She signals that she is worth being provided for. When a man senses she has that can nurture him and perhaps children one day, she signals this with her countenance and with how she receives his advancements and intentions. And I don't need a man, I just want a warm body. Attitude tells a man this woman is not a good candidate for a romantic partnership. Something that takes a willingness to give, to support, and to receive. A woman open to receiving masculine expressions of intention, but who is unwilling to give feminine expressions of attention is not a good candidate. Modern feminism is the most misogynistic movement in Western history. It tells women that equality means being like men. Too many women are doing a poor imitation of men and then blaming men for not being attracted to a poor imitation of their already wanting selves. Men and women have roles, both specific and general. The details of those roles vary from couple to couple, person to person. What I find feminine might not be what my friend finds feminine, but we both reconi that feminine qualities are different from masculine qualities. That's all Walsh is saying. There are roles, and it is unreasonable to expect a person to fill a role while being unwilling to play your own. I'm Kira Davison, I'm just saying this has been a presentation of the FCB podcast Network, where Real Talk lives Visitors online at Fcbpodcasts dot com.
