Bernard Chapin at PJM takes a look at why men need to be saved from the New York Times and how Kathleen Parker's book, Save the Males: Why Men Matter Why Women Should Care
can help.
can help.
posted by Helen at 6:09 AM
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Contributors
Previous Posts
- Krav Maga
- Ask Dr. Helen: Men and Rape
- Fleeced by Dick Morris
- Katherine Berry at Pajamas Media discusses social ...
- Tidbits from USA Today
- If you have been following the Heller case, here i...
- “I love being a doctor but I hate practicing medic...
- eBay as Therapy?
- Sex and Housework
- Tough Love Needed
23 Comments:
mac's comment is brilliant, and sums up something that's been bugging me for years:
"Men and women are different. I don’t know why feminists think that men are better than women. Get on with developing the feminine and stop telling women that their sex is second class to men."
Damn straight. For most of my life I've been aware that feminists consider "woman" to be an inherently pejorative word. But why? Weren't these the people who were trying to produce equality, if not domination for that sex? It makes little sense to belittle men in all aspects, and then disassemble yourself trying to be them. Vive la Différence!
pj's correct, mac's comment is brilliant, which is sad. Stating such an obvious truth shouldn't take brilliance.
Chapin makes excellent points. The NYT is no more a newspaper than Keith Olberman is a journalist. I heard Kathleen Parker interviewed on WLW in Cincinnati the other day. She is not only smart but delightful.
I have two sons and two daughters. All seem to enjoy being their own sex/gender. I never try to address non-gender issues as gender issues. Doing chores isn't a gender issue, it's a "fair share" issue. And a fair share is whatever a couple decides it is, not what some writer or survey does.
Of my three sisters, the one who is the most liberal/feminist owes the great majority of her success to her husband. Kind of like Hillary. But she's sees almost everything thru the stained glasses of her political beliefs and reality escapes her.
From john-m over there:
"I came from an “egalitarian” marriage in which I stayed home and took care of the kids when they were young–and guess what? I enjoyed it greatly, but it helped produce a divorce."
Thats a fear I have if I went that route in a marriage. I wouldn't have a problem with being a stay at home dad for the most part but I also could a have decent income possible from just pure investments. If not, there is no way I'd consider such a marriage situation given current laws and attitudes.
I trust my wife more than I trust the current divorce laws. Given the state of current divorce laws, that is crucial.
Trey
The vast majority of Americans pay no heed to these sorts of NY Times pieces that denigrate men -- or for that matter, ANY sorts of NY Times features pieces. They are written for the enlightend souls in America's Northeast Corridor who already believe, among many other things, that the entire male gender needs an overhaul due to cultural defects.
I sometimes wonder if these enlightened writers ever stop to consider that they might be insulting women by telling them they are oppressed in a marriage they voluntarily -- in most cases, very happily -- entered into. I suspect the thought never occurred to them.
I would love to hear any of these brilliant thinkers explain exactly what is the biological effect of testosterone. Their entire shtick is premised on the notion that men and women are interchangeable (which, of course, defies every serious scientific study ever done on the subject). To them, the male propensity for agression and ambition is cultural. And the male propensity for creativity is merely a manifestation of men's oppression of women -- because, you know, men have denied women the opportunity to be creative. Ah, right.
Peregrine John, bravo!
I found this exceedingly dumb:
Neither would be the keeper of the mental to-do lists; neither of their careers would take precedence. Both would be equally likely to plan a birthday party or know that the car needs oil or miss work for a sick child or remember (without prompting) to stop at the store for diapers and milk.
Maybe this works out in some families, but in my experience both in the work world and home, when "everyone" is in charge, no one really is. And then you find yourself run out of diapers.
Or toilet paper.
I have to grocery shop. No one to share the chore (not lamenting!) I see men in the store all the time - on the cell - asking what brand, what size container, or where in the store a particular item is, and so forth.
Clearly, the right person is not doing the right task at a time like that. Not when it takes two to perform a one person task.
Feminists, I believe, hate their sex, hate themselves. And they project it on to the male of the species. Might that have been called penis envy years ago?
As I say in my profile, everybody wants to be "understood", but nobody wants to be "figured out".
549, it's not just the men with the cell phones in the grocery store, it's every group: women, men, young, old, all races. If you needs something, buy it, take it home and that's that. I don't understand the consult with one's entire circle of friends, loved ones and family over what brand of yogurt.
I don't understand the consult with one's entire circle of friends, loved ones and family over what brand of yogurt.
Well, in the case of the hapless husband, chances are he'll get a chewing out if he brings home the wrong thing.
I really hate it when I have to ask my husband to stop at the store. Not because he's an idiot who can't be trusted to buy the right thing, but because it's such a waste of his time. Since I do nearly all the shopping, I know where things are, I know exactly what I'm looking for, and I know the price I'm willing to pay for negotiable items. In the time it takes him to locate the milk, I have that, the yogurt, veggies and have swung by the meat dept. to see what's on sale.
That's not male bashing - he's perfectly capable but because of our particular family setup, it just doesn't make sense for him to acquire that level of intimacy with the grocery store.
I am not sure efficient grocery shopping is a skillset to be proud of, but there it is.
I am not sure efficient grocery shopping is a skillset to be proud of, but there it is.
Why not be proud of it? Larry's First Law is that "laziness is the foundation of efficiency - give a job to a lazy guy and he'll find the simpliest, fastest, and easiest way to get the job done right the first time. Anything else is more work."
Not seeking the efficient way to do things is wasteful. I work very hard at achieving my current level of laziness.
Just the sub-titles of this book are an amazing commentary on the bizarre nature of our times.
A
1. Someone pens a book with the sub-title--
" Why Men Matter " -- and its not satire !
uh...only if you care about art, literature, poetry, music, science, medicine, engineering, computer science, mathematics, physics, philosophy,religion, chemistry, technology, rocket science, the economy etc ad infinitum...
If someone needs to be informed "why men matter"-- even just from an instrumental point of view ( female self-interest) -- they have long ago exited the arena of rationality.
" Why men matter"--
needs to be argued ? What does that say about our times.Civilization doesn't exist without men and will not continue without them. Men-- males-- created civilization-- how can anyone's mind be so addled by ideology or pathology (or a sense of inferiority ) as to be blind to something so obvious.
2. Back in the day, when sanity and civility were more salient,it was impolite to note this obvious sex difference in achievement and creativity...( no gentleman ever said anything that could be taken as demeaning or unkind to women... women now have no such restraint vis-a-vie men )
no one thought of challenging it.. or acting as if it didn't exist.
But the modern woman is apparently oblivious to it-- and thinks dispensing with men in various ways is an option ( what does that say about women !)-- hence this book,
apparently,
to inform the girls that men serve useful purposes for us girls and so us girls should stop harming them , because us girls have already won ( the feminism started out OK lie ) and more damage to men just hurts...us girls... ( its gone "too far" ).. so lets "care".. because it helps us girls...
because its all about
us girls.
An argument that can only appeal to a moral cretin... and assumes an audience so base ( women )that you can only approach them by appealing to their self-interest and not their sense of morality or fairness or justice or even decency.
Perhaps Ms Parker thought that arguing that the treatment of men was " just" immoral, wrong, unjust, unfair, illegal, unconstitutional, etc would have no effect on women. The title and sub-titles bear witness to that assumption. She indicts her audience in the very act of adressing them.
3. Women should praise God everyday that they have the male gender around to make life easier and more meaningful. Without men, women's lives would be "nasty, brutish, and short"--
B. And then " Why women should care"--
After women are informed that "men matter", ie, serve useful functions for women, women are to be encouraged to 'care" about men... to stop degrading them and violating their civil rights in so many ways...
If you don't care about men, the useful functions they serve for us girls will be undermined. We may even have to submit to the draft! SO , girls, "care".. because men serve some useful functions for us.
C.
1. Some of Parker's coments I have read place her firmly in the " Stop hurting men because its hurting us girls" coven of "conservative" female pseudo-male friendly commentators...
Their apparent 'concern' for men is actually a concern for women-- they are just as obsessed with women as are the feminists.
They rush to men's defense when the unilateral war against them starts to hurt the only people who matter-- us girls.
2. As someone noted, the conservative gals want the two Cs they associate-- wrongly-- with feminism-- careers and contraception.
But they fight the feminists because they see the old special privileges for women as good for women and should be maintained-- even though they violate men's rights and discriminate against men.
Yes,This "equality "stuff is good- if it helps women... which is the only relevant thing... but if it starts to affect women negatively... then lets defend women's traditional privileges and claim things " have gone to far".
MS Parker may be an exception... hope her book gets cheaper on Amazon... and
She is pretty hot in some of the pics on the Internet.
I feel for some of the guys I've "overheard in those grocery store conversations. Sometimes, you don't have to be real close by. You can hear the spouse screaming through the cell phone. On one occasion, I saw the cell phone get flipped close, and the half full shopping cart abandoned by the man now making his way toward the exit.
I did not see a grocery list though. Perhaps that would have helped.
I'm telling you - some men - many, many men are still married because they simply cannot afford the financial consequences of walking away, coupled with the threat of not seeing their children. Anyone who does not believe it, or see it that way, is not seeing it as it truly is. Until it hurts MORE to stay married than it does to be BROKE and NOT be able to see your kids, you stay married, if in a terrible relationship.
There is no organ between any female lags on this planet worth what I have seen just in grocery stores. And God knows men fight their whole lives to get back in there, after fighting to get out on their birthday. It's burned in!
In all honesty, it took me a couple years to realize this fact. That, no longer being around the woman I was married to for two decades plus is the greatest thing that happened to me in all the years that went by after saying I do. Realization of that was my true Independence Day.
Which reminds me - Happy Fourth of July to all.
"I'm telling you - some men - many, many men are still married because they simply cannot afford the financial consequences of walking away, coupled with the threat of not seeing their children."
---
Yup.
You don't have to broadcast it to the general public, though - get it across to young men. They have to know.
...get it across to young men. They have to know.
So do young women. Mothers have to raise their daughters to do better as wives/partners than this generation is (apparently by you guys' comments) doing.
I don't know why but this reminds of a dance recital my girl participated in when she was just little. After her group did their little ballet thing we had to watch the older kids. There was some hip-hop performance by, oh, 8 year olds that was just disgusting. Sleazy, suggestive dancing. I was stunned and looked around for other reactions. The moms looked so proud of their little sluts-in-training, I mean daughters. The dads' faces just showed utter disbelief, and some anger, that their daughters were dancing that way. They obviously had not been clued inn on the content of their daughters' dance classes. I assumed then that the dads just had had no interest in their daughters' activities till they had to attend the recital. Now I wonder if they had just been shut out of it.
B. And then " Why women should care"--
After women are informed that "men matter", ie, serve useful functions for women, women are to be encouraged to 'care" about men... to stop degrading them and violating their civil rights in so many ways...
If you don't care about men, the useful functions they serve for us girls will be undermined.
One of the best posts I have ever seen.
"I'm telling you - some men - many, many men are still married because they simply cannot afford the financial consequences of walking away, coupled with the threat of not seeing their children."
---
Yup.
You don't have to broadcast it to the general public, though - get it across to young men. They have to know.
Oh, this fact is not lost on younger men. They all had mothers and fathers and they grew up in the war zone which families have become over the past 40 years.
I've not read Parker's book, although I did take her to task over the watered-down nature of her columns several years ago. I have to give her props for doing something more substantive than her weekly 1500 words that said little and always posed a silly rhetorical question at the end, most often starting with "Maybe it's time we ..." and the suggestion would always be a fairly radical departure from the direction the culture has taken for the past 40 years.
What I find most interesting are the subtexts.
A.1 - Men don't matter to women, that is why women need to have it explained to them.
B.1 - Women don't care, and can only be coerced into caring when their own self-interest is at stake.
And, of course, the title indicates that women can save us poor challenged creatures, if only they can be convinced there is utility to them in doing so. Only, a lot of men aren't going to sign on for her prescriptions for their salvation.
The best line in the comments so far is this -
no longer being around the woman I was married to for two decades plus is the greatest thing that happened to me in all the years that went by after saying I do.
That says it all. That is what a lot of marriages look like from the outside - the kind of things that give one of those "there, but for the grace of god, go I" moments.
And the way fatherhood is portrayed in the media? Who would want to sign on for that? A "father" is likely the last thing in the world that a lot of young men are going to aspire to be. To be a father is to be an idiot in the view of the media and a lot of this culture.
They ought to hire the recruiting firm that does the military recruiting commercials. At least they attempt to make a difficult proposition look attractive.
to inform the girls that men serve useful purposes for us girls and so us girls should stop harming them
I'm glad that I'm not the only one who has noticed that this argument seems to be perhaps the most common appeal, by female commentators, to more equitable treatment of men. That is, treat men better or they will not be able or willing to serve women properly. It's like advising someone not to beat their dog too much or they won't respond properly to your training. Another conservative pundit who makes such appeals is Christina Hoff Summers.
Frankly Dr. Helen is one of very few female pundits that I'm aware of who argues for the just treatment of men from the perspectives of common decency and fairness.
But I would be careful not to assume that this is a universal trait of women. I'd moved to the US as a young adult and have lived in a few other countries. It's my impression that the US culture instills in many women a sort of adolescent narcissism. Perhaps this is because they are so frequently promoted the ideas that the most important thing in life is that they love themselves above all else, and are 'goddesses' and so deserve whatever they desire. In this model, men are simply a means to an end - someone to facilitate the 'lifestyle' that they are entitled to.
Female friends who have visited my family from overseas have remarked on this phenomena as well - they've commented that American women are often deliberately irrational and childish and very self absorbed.
Marbel:
I learned the hard way the hazards of questioning the dance moves and attire of prostitots fresh off a dance performance. Those mothers can be fierce.
I still think that when the signage of a restaurant says, "Shirts and Shoes Required" the least the tiny skanks could do is put a shirt on over their bikini bra tops and not shake their money makers in front of the other customers. But that's just me.
The worst thing that can happen to women involved with, and true believers of, the current version of the "feminist movement" is to let them have their way. I'm all for it. I'll even hold the door.
Men have known for a very long time that you can't live with them, but have falsely believed you can't live without them. Just like some folks can't quit smoking.
Feministas believe they can live without men, provided they can take them to court and get everything first. Restraining orders and orders of protection are very handy tools, eh? Women get coached through those when they go downtown to file them. They already know that they can even create the situation, and still file. The orders do not have to have a particle of truth in them. They only have to be filed. A police officer is then dispatched to the male and it is handed to him.
One can produce witnesses, being friends and neighbors, including your own children, who can say such and such never happened. No matter. You can prove you weren't even there at particular times and dates. No matter. The dates and times can be changed, proving that the accuser's head is trapped on the inside of the anal sphincter. No matter.
Something rarely taken into consideration by people who are from "that side of the fence" (who visit here) is that the stories relayed by most men in here, are from personal experience. Mine is. I can only speak for myself, from my personal experiences in life. Dr. Helen's blog is a moving picture. You can't waltz in, take a snap shot, and waltz out with all the facts.
It is not "all women". Those on the other side seem to think it is "all men", however. There are a few who are a breath of fresh air. If having a healthy attitude and outlook on relationships (ummm, normal?) is to be considered a breath of fresh air, and not a true norm.
My daughters have been taught self respect, self dependence (I prefer that term to independence)and have been taught that it is individuals they need to know, not groups. The males my daughters are with are people they want to be with, for no other reason than the fact they want to be with them. They can make it on their own. And as they are educated and capable, they would have no one to blame if they could not. They are no more a part of a man hating feminist group than they are clingy "gotta have a man, any man", types.
BR549,
My daughters have been taught self respect, self dependence...hey are no more a part of a man hating feminist group than they are clingy "gotta have a man, any man", types.
Good on you, man. I hope they have lots of babies, and surround themselves with like-minded people who are also having lots of babies. Then maybe the next generation will not be so screwed up.
Hi, marbel.
Although I could benefit greatly from the government trough, I lean too far right for that. Although my kids are aware of my political leanings, I did not shovel it to them. Some might say they are more "balanced" (gag), politically. I attribute it to their exposure to the other hand all their lives, from outside the home.
So we part ways concerning many things. That's what I get for trying to teach them how to think and not what to think, while they were educated in a system that taught them what to think more than how to think. I am opinionated, and the above is my opinion.
I like math. It's the true science. All other knowledge seems to be based on perception.
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..........................
383movie成人影城ut正妹 聊天室倉井空免費a影片伊莉論壇tw 18 net18禁成人網免費性愛影片aa 片俱樂部 免費avsexy girl video moviea片18禁地少女遊戲嘟嘟成人網洪爺後官電影院辣妺視訊線上 aa 片試看黑澀會美眉容瑄sex520免費電影sexy girl video moviesex520免費影片線上 aa 片試看嘟嘟h成人夜色sex999免費影片
I think he makes a good argument about men needing to work, but he doesn't really elaborate on how equal time at home is causing problems. The couple in the story seems robotic about making sure every little detail is exactly equal and that should cause a lot of trouble, but I think it is good for each partner to help out with chores. I read an article once saying that partners that both do chores are more likely to stay married. My uncle was talking to me about dating and he basically said that talking to women is the same as men, because afterall they are just people. Well, sure there are topics that you can talk with anyone about, but women are physically different than men and that effects their emotions and hormons and thinking.
Here is the picture of the cover.
Cham wrote: 549, it's not just the men with the cell phones in the grocery store, it's every group: women, men, young, old, all races. If you needs something, buy it, take it home and that's that. I don't understand the consult with one's entire circle of friends, loved ones and family over what brand of yogurt.
I was watching a program recently and it was talking about this, but not in regard to sex. It basically said that you don't have to think anymore or figure out what someone wants because you have instant access to them by phone.
P.S. Helen - This one also has Chinese spam!
Post a Comment
<< Home