knights and nooses
In January, Harper’s Magazine published the following excerpt from one of the federally funded, abstinence-only programs being taught in US high-schools:
Deep inside every man is a knight in shining armor, ready to rescue a maiden and slay a dragon. When a man feels trusted, he is free to be the strong, protecting man he longs to be.
Imagine a knight traveling through the countryside. He hears a princess in distress and rushes gallantly to slay the dragon. The princess calls out, “I think this noose will work better!” and throws him a rope. As she tells him how to use the noose, the knight obliges her and kills the dragon. Everyone is happy, except the knight, who doesn’t feel like a hero. He is depressed and feels unsure of himself. He would have preferred to use his own sword.
The knight goes on another trip. The princess reminds him to take the noose. The knight hears another maiden in distress. He remembers how he used to feel before he met the princess; with a surge of confidence, he slays the dragon with his sword. All the townspeople rejoice, and the knight is a hero. He never returned to the princess. Instead, he lived happily ever after in the village, and eventually married the maiden—but only after making sure she knew nothing about nooses.
Moral of the story: Occasional assistance may be alright, but too much will lessen a man’s confidence or even turn him away from his princess.
Three months later, I still can’t stop thinking about this excerpt. Aside from the obvious ridiculousness of it, I’m amazed that the US government can endorse such a message while simultaneously wondering why so few American women challenge stereotypes and enter into traditionally male-dominated subjects such as computer science, mathematics and physics. What a country.
(The full article is reprinted here.)
April 18th, 2005 at 1:09 am
I can’t event figure out what the message has to do with sex and/or abstinence, other than the highly suggestive use of “sword” and “noose”.
April 18th, 2005 at 1:19 am
I believe the text is taken from an abstinence program entitled Choosing the Best SOUL MATE, so I think it probably isn’t directly (at least, not as far as I can tell!) related to the act of sex, but is more general advice for high school girls on “how to keep their man.”
April 18th, 2005 at 8:53 am
Wow, what a disturbing article. The subtext of that bit seems to be, “Don’t challenge the fragile male sexual ego”. Way to enforce traditional values. The full article is more disturbing:
“Sexual relationships often lower the self-respect of both partners”
“At conception, the baby comes into being.” (anti-abortion loaded language)
“The Bush Administration is providing $167 million for abstinence-only programs this war.” (probably a typo at the end, but what a typo)
The lists of “5 major needs” do not overlap at all, and women are assumed not to want sexual fulfilment from a sexual relationship.
April 18th, 2005 at 12:33 pm
That’s it! I’m leaving my oppressive realistic job in order to sit in an ivory tower waiting for my soulmate (as long as he can give me financial support, that is)!
Perhaps more worrying for me than the abstinence only aspect, is the casual use of loaded pro-life language.
April 19th, 2005 at 2:15 am
Well, as a Canadian, more or less, I am not surprises at the ‘tightassness’ of the American Govt’.
April 19th, 2005 at 2:25 am
BTW Hanna, I find your blog so well knitted (no masculinism intended because that comes from ‘une expression’ in French) that I added it to my toolbar). You keep me “zen”….
April 19th, 2005 at 3:24 am
hmm…. is this about condoms? are they really that bad?
April 20th, 2005 at 2:52 am
I suppose, in the light of my comment about folding laundry, I’m the one supposed to be slaying the fucking dragons, too, now. What else is new? Geez, what a drip.
Noose? Condoms? I’m confused. Is ignorance bliss or something? Guess I missed it in this department.
I bet the princess eventually found someone who could appreciate her talent and lived happier (if more argumentatively) ever after.
Were I a spammer, I wouldn’t care whether my comment was rejected or not. (REALLY BAD WORDS DIRECTED AT YOU)
November 16th, 2007 at 9:56 pm
i think that it is a horrible article thing or whatever. male pride is constantly offended whenever a strong woman is with him, because they know in the very backs of their pathetically tiny minds that we are stronger, smarter, and just all around better. it’s appalling to have it put into words that they way to ‘keep your man happy’ is to have to dumb yourself down to his level so he feels heroic and useful.