What exactly do you have in mind?

Over at The American Scene, one of the contributors writes:

The question, of course, is where we go from here. I’m with Hymowitz’ critics in recognizing that there was a reason we threw out the chivalric code, and if that were our only alternative, awkwardness would be a small price to pay. But I don’t think it is the only alternative. Creating a new code of etiquette would eliminate the guessing game for nice guys and allow for the punishment of the pseudo-nice-guy brutes who emulate pickup-artist behavior because they claim it’s the only way they can get women’s attention.

A lot of liberals seem to view any social code as intentional or unintentional discrimination in disguise, which is an attitude I don’t necessarily share. But given just how lost the “nice boys” seem to be, I wish people would give just a little more consideration to creating a new, egalitarian social code, instead of assuming that awkwardness is a necessary consequence of equality. The alternative is watching variations on this xkcd strip get reused year after year, each time provoking a wistful sigh from thousands of nerds who think they’re unlucky in love but are actually just timid.

How can you have egalitarianism without assuming that men and women are exactly the same? The author does not discuss female misbehavior and exaggerated expectations, and the social consequences of these, either. Another sign that TAS just isn't traditional or conservative enough.

Kay Hymowitz's original piece: Love in the Time of Darwinism. I can understand the harsh reaction against Will Wilkinson. 'Nuff said.