Browbeaten into Submission
Now here is a blogger who believes that the proper role for a man in marriage is submission. Actually, the blog of this "Mad Suburban Dad" sounds like it is written by a woman. Apparently, if you don't acknowlege that men should kowtow to women in marriage, act frightened of their spouse's wrath, hide out in a tent like a wuss (see entry 4-4-2006 and 4-11-2006) and say you are "on strike" instead of confronting her, or otherwise kiss up to women at every opportunity--you are pegged as a woman-hater. What do you think--is this "guy's" blog satire or not?
Update: Normally, I do not care what other people write about my blog or me in their own personal blogs--it is usually of little interest. However, in this case of Mad Suburban Dad, I think his blog and commenters speak volumes about the way our society treats men and those of us who are female who do not toe the party line of the virtues of women and the sins of men. Just call them sexist, woman haters, racist or whatever to make them look bad. Sorry MadDad, this type of behavior no longer works--everyone sees through this cheap psychological maneuver.
Mad Dad calls my commenters (and me, by association) "women-haters and the women who love them," yet here are the statements from his commenters regarding myself, Cathy Young, and a woman named Heather:
Wow, it sounds like Mad Dad and his commenters are the woman-haters to me.
Update: Normally, I do not care what other people write about my blog or me in their own personal blogs--it is usually of little interest. However, in this case of Mad Suburban Dad, I think his blog and commenters speak volumes about the way our society treats men and those of us who are female who do not toe the party line of the virtues of women and the sins of men. Just call them sexist, woman haters, racist or whatever to make them look bad. Sorry MadDad, this type of behavior no longer works--everyone sees through this cheap psychological maneuver.
Mad Dad calls my commenters (and me, by association) "women-haters and the women who love them," yet here are the statements from his commenters regarding myself, Cathy Young, and a woman named Heather:
Well, I have been a reader here for a while now and I have always thought your entries were well written and humorous. I can only hope my marrage is as happy as your is, we should all hope to be as lucky. I went ahead and read those two womens blogs and I have to tell you I am ashamed to be a woman right now. Those two humorless twits are ruining the reputations of women everywhere turning us into nagging humorless bitches who will leave you at the drop of a hat. Accckkkk... they make me sick. I appologize for the rest of us who are not bland, cranky, miserable, lackluster and emotionally repressive.
frankly they sound a couple of jealous ol' BFHs (Bimbo from a Terribly Hot Place ;-)w absolutely no sense of humor to me! I loved the story of the 'well-managed' man and think that tho Mrs Mad-Dad was apparently born a 'Yankee', that she's really a Southern Lady at heart (w all the smarts that being a Lady entails), and you sir are obviously a Gentleman (w all the courtesy that being a Gentleman requires).
Well MadDad, first of all, Heather is an A-hole. You know it, I know it, and the rest of blogland should know it..... I wonder what Dr. Helen & Cathy Young's relationships are like? Tee Hee.
Wow, it sounds like Mad Dad and his commenters are the woman-haters to me.
posted by Helen at 7:59 AM
34 Comments:
I thought I was the only one who went on strike.
-SayUncle
I didn't read the whole thing, but it appears that he intended it all as a joke. Unfortunately, "humor" seems to be nothing more than an attack on somebody together with demand that this other person not be annoyed or retaliate, all so the attacker can demonstrate his or her wit and/or social dominance. For example, I've had women tell me that "The Scum Manifesto", which openly proposes killing men, is supposed to be funny. (It's on the Internet. Go forth and Google.) I'm not laughing! Moreover it's stuff like this that made me get rid of my sense of humor.
This has to be humorous. I would guess that it may well be a woman writing it due to phraseology. Would a man write this: "My spine straightens straight up and my ears are on full alert, like a deer who has heard a noise while sipping water from a creek."?
BTW - if you want to go on strike by a 25 foot Airstream trailer and park it in the driveway. It may well be more nicely equipped than your house. You don't want your "better half" to think your suffering.
I mean "buy" the trailer.
"What do you think--is this "guy's" blog satire or not?"
I think I've figured it out. Mad Suburban Dad is a joint project between Dr. Helen, Instapundit, and Frank J. from IMAO.
Sneaky!
helen,
Get out in the real world. You're playing the Victorian with a case of the vapors and he's just laughing at you.
It appears you just can't recognize satire and humor when you see it. Well, the rest of us can. What happened to your development?
Dear Mad Dad,
I'm writing this here because I KNOW you're looking. If it was humor and satire you were striving for, sadly, you missed by a large margin. Now, please give your wife the key so that she can put your testicles back in the lockbox.
Frank H
...that was humor? I have a special love of satire, even when it's directed at me personally. But only if it's funny.
(It's like the difference between a Knowing Laugh and a Humorless Bark. Subtle only if you're emotionally invested in the joke.)
WWWAAAAHHH!!! My wife is mean to me! WWWAAHHHH!!!
Humor or not, I am sick of victim-mentality of any sex, age, race, religion, etc.
No one is doing anything to you, you are doing it to yourself.
Get therapy or shut up.
All fine and good to be sick of the mentality now that women no longer really benefit from it, and men are starting to get a little sympathy.
Tell you what americanwoman...you go ahead and be sick of it, I'll just do what comes naturally...namely ignore the whining to a large degree....and those who want to try and get somewhere with the victim card can go right ahead.
Seeing as how you are the beneficiary of 40 odd years of "victim speak", you really should take your own advice.
Factory
Ok now I'm totally confused. MadMom claimed, within the comments of this blog, that the post was satire in the vein of Swift's 'A Modest Proposal', but now MadDad claims that it was geniunely autobiographical and he's personally offended?!? -- what's MadDad not telling MadMom ;)
But I can appreciate that MadDad resents having strangers judge him and his marriage. So I won't.
And, yes he's a guy, he's not a milktoast, and his blog is worth following IMO.
----------
One other point. It's not appropriate to judge blogs, or blog communities, by the rants posted in the comment section of a single post. Bloggers apply various standards to how they moderate a/o filter comments, some more liberally than others. That specific topic did seem to draw some pretty angry people. But others on gender issues have been much more moderate.
I find it both interesting and worrying that you have failed to quote the other 23 comments on the blog. Why is it that you have chosen to go about picking at someone else's life instead of writing about your own? Contraversy is one thing, incerdibly insulting is another. And you call yourself a Doctor. If you paid all that money for a PHd and ended up at this level, I'd ask for a refund. Or possibly a brush-up course in manners.
Chris,
Thank you for your comment.
I originally thought that the MadDad, etc. was all a joke. But given all the hostility emanating from that direction, maybe not. Maybe it's some women's dream, and most men's nightmare, of how married life should be.
It is funny how all the name calling starts from the "feminist" side. Of course, what else can they do when there is no logical, rational argument to fall back upon?
Hmmmm. I tried to follow the controversy and ideas but got lost. I decided that it was likely not worth my time to sort it out. I did notice that Dr. Helen was discussing the posts she read while I could not really follow what Mad-Dad was trying to say.
One part I DID get was when Dr. Helen was criticized for NOT THINKING LIKE A PSYCHOLOGIST. You know, not being leftist and seeing everyone as a victim and feeling their pain.
Thank God. That is one of the main reasons I read this blog! Psychology is being used to EXCUSE behavior while it is best used to UNDERSTAND behavior. Too many in our field have become professional rescuers (in a drama sense) and so that has become part of our public persona. YUCK.
I feel better now!
Trey
I like MadDad, he is funny and has a good sense of humor. "Well managed" goes for both husband and wife. Both spouces make compromises and that is what "well managed" is. You change and consider your spouce, instead of always thinking of yourself. When your married, you have to think of things as "us" instead of just me all the time. That's well managed.
Well, if it's valid to judge a blog and a blogger by using selected comments, the following comment is one people can use to judge Helen.
All women are viscious, selfish, and wothless pieces of crap! I'm sure Helen agrees with me!
And Helen can't spell "worthless," either!
Hi Trey,
Yes, I agree that psychology has degenerated into a profession used to excuse behavior and perpetuate victimhood. I am glad there are psychologists out there such as yourself who still think that personal responsibility and accountability are important. It has harmed our profession that so many see it as a function of the left to be used to let people off the hook. I have read that juries rarely take defense experts seriously because of this left-leaning tendency. I can't say as I blame them.
Helen,
Yes, that may be a part of the reason juries rarely take defense experts seriously. But let me give you an example of a child custody case I investigated for a District Court here in Colorado. The father was obsessed with portraying the mother in the worst possible light, because she had the nerve to leave him! He was very wealthy, and she left with nothing except herself and the children. He hired a forensic psychologist, who asked to talk to me after I had spent some time doing my investigation for the court, but before I actually sat down to write my report. It was so obvious to me that this psychologist was merely a hired gun with only one goal: help this man win his case without regard to the facts of the case.
His motives were so transparent, that I had no respect for him as a professional.
i Seeing as how you are the beneficiary of 40 odd years of "victim speak", you really should take your own advice.'
Do you know me personally? Do you know the facts of my life? I'm sure you don't so please don't make assumptions. And if there has been '40 years of victim speak' it would pale in comparison to the hundreds if not thousands of years of male domination over women. Care to deny that, or just conveniently forgot about it?
At any rate, I don't have sympathy for the victim mentality from any aspect.
It seems psychologists just can't keep from jumping on the victim wagon. Some choose one set of victims; some choose another. But most seem to be riding that wagon for all it's worth. It makes me wonder if psychology has any real substance.
It seems americanwoman needs to be reminded of the earlier hard questions about (A) women's consistent presence in the elite dominant and dominating classes throughout human history, to say nothing of american women's, in particular, purchase, sale, 'ownership' and so on of male slaves in recent american history, as compared to their power relative to men within the strata of the social classes, and (B) as to whether she herself would rather be a male of those historical peon, peasant, subordinated lower classes, or a slave, than she would a woman of the elite, aristocratic, dominating classes, or slave-owner.
But of course she still has yet to provide a sensible answer to those points ITFP.
Thus actually demonstrating, behaviorally, her susceptibility to the identity cult of gender-based victimization-esteem. . .precisely as Dr. Helen, so to speak, diagnoses.
Chris,
You can't spell "worthless," either.
' Chris Key Says: There is not a single shred of evidence to verify your subjective insinuation, which renders your argument as an ad-personam fallacy.'
Subjective? Try reading any history book you twit. You are so far out there, you aren't even worth addressing.
I'm sure there were some male slaves that were better off than some wives of wealthy men. What is the point you are trying to make? That not ALL men were able to subject ALL women?
Me thinks you all doth protest too much!
Darren,
Are men oppressed by women?
Look. As long as you continue to view the world exclusively in terms of gender-based power relations, your understanding of real life, and your consequential happiness and success as a human being, are going to be likewise severely limited. Such an exclusive focus upon gender-based power relations reduces your model of the world so drastically that you miss out on essential knowledge in a host of other areas.
The fundamental human competition and conflict is not between men and women, but between individualism and tribalism, between autonomy and dependency, between self-determination and authoritarian dominance. The ruling elites and their hierarchy of con-artist parasites who try to convince you otherwise are simply attempting to distract you from the real power relations -- the ones that the founding fathers recognized and used as a philosophical basis for the creation of our fundamental, revolutionary social contract between the State and the Citizen.
Bottom line, people who get you all whooped up about one gender oppressing the other are somewhere on a hierarchical continuum that runs from emotionalistic tools at the bottom to ruthless profiteers at the top.
The resentment of "men's historical oppression of women" is simply a programmed trance people get sucked into so that they won't notice how much of their wealth and energy are being siphoned off, and how much control over their lives is being established and maintained, by the very same people promoting and spreading that resentment.
Get it?
Your enemies are not the other gender. Your enemies are the people telling you the other gender is your enemy. And the other gender is not your oppressors. Your oppressors are the people today, and the people throughout history, who keep tricking you into resenting your peers and equals, so that you never notice how much the tricksters are taking from you, and how much the tricksters are getting you to do for them.
They're con artists and demagogues and liars, and the real enemy. And you need to let go of the warm fuzzy righteous indignation that their lies awaken in you. Because they're using you through that to distract everybody's attention from just how much wealth and power they've wrongfully acquired.
I can't argue the soundness of your argument, Chris, because I am not insane. I'll leave it to you to keep spewing it all over the place.
Darren - I never said that women were better off without men. I happen to like men (well most of them anyway). But it's not in my nature to ignore historical facts. Women were relegated to a subservient role in the past for the most part. In government, in education, in the arts, in religion. I also don't 'resent' this oppression or any other event in history that did not happen to me personally.
And again it must be pointed that most people were 'relegated' -- or better said, subjugated -- to a subservient role in the past; and among the few class elites who did and benefited from said subjugating, women have been consistently well-represented.
The point invalidating her view of reality remains the same: that historically, there has been a vastly, overwhelmingly greater relative difference in freedom and self-determination between men and women of the subservient subjugated classes versus men and women of the ruling classes, in comparison to the relative difference in freedom and self-determination between men versus women within the subservient subjugated and ruling elite classes.
That is a crucial historical fact which she herself is indeed ignoring.
So again, americanwoman, was or was not virtually everybody relegated to a subservient role in the past for the most part -- in government, in education, in the arts, in religion? Yes or no?
And given the choice, which would you personally have rather been -- a typical male of the subservient subjugated classes, or a typical female of the ruling elite classes?
Which would you rather have been -- a typical male slave, or a typical female slave-owner?
You are weird.
You go on somebody else's blog and attack their opinions and lifestyle choices on your blog? You could've made your point with out linking to him. Now you and your minions want to harass him?
Really! Get a life. If all psychologists are as judgmental and mean spirited as you are, all of us have been warned to stay away.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
5 分鐘護半身視訊美女tvnet0204 我愛你視訊美女拳tvnet0204 我愛你視訊美女拳love 免費視訊美女影音觀賞love 免費視訊美女影音觀賞aa-dvdaa-dvd成人影城成人影城383視訊影音城383視訊影音城383成人影城383成人影城383movie成人影城383movie成人影城av383av383環球影音城環球影音城免費視訊聊天免費視訊聊天免費視訊聊天室免費視訊聊天室免費視訊 173liveshow免費視訊 173liveshow
Post a Comment
<< Home