All in the Family featured the curmudgeonly Archie Bunker. Archie was television’s most famous grouch, blunt, blustering, straightforward and untouched by the PC crowd. He was the archetype of the conservative male. Michael desprately tried to reeducate him, but he persisted in his breviloquence.



Looking back at the last 40 years, we realize: ARCHIE WAS RIGHT!

7/25/2014

Quote

I've been kicking this around in my head and wanted to get it down someplace.

"If you are a man, it is impossible for you to 'get in touch with your feminine side'.  You don't have one.  You're a man.  If God wanted you to have a "feminine side" he would have made you female.  In the beginning God created them male and female, not metrosexual and less hairy menstruating metrosexual with mammaries.  Want to get in touch with the feminine?  Get married.  Touch her.  See, it's nice isn't it?  It's nice because you're a man.  She was made that way to please you.  Do you know why no one ever tells a women to get in touch with her masculine side?  Nobody likes a less hairy metrosexual with man boobs.  It's a offense against nature.  MALE.  FEMALE.  That's it.  There is no benefit to a man being slightly women or a women trying to be a man.  It doesn't work that way.  Call it a design feature."
This rant brought to you courtesy of all the idiots claiming to be Christians who can't be bothered to glean even the slightest clue regarding the natural God made differences between the sexes.  We've made a huge mess of women wanting to be men and men trying to please women by thinking/acting like them. 

My grandmothers had no problem understanding things as "a man's point of view".  "Man talk" and "women talk" weren't bad things that somehow degraded the other person just by existing.  They knew that women and men didn't see the world in the same way.  Somehow that was OK.

7 comments:

Susan said...

Slight nit pick here. Feed a man enough soy products and you will see a man in touch with his feminine side. He won't be able to stop it. Soy is great for older women who are going through menopause, but men are just not designed for all that estrogen.

I think this is a great rant. All real women want to know really is that a man at least listens and appreciates their point of view. I would be absolutely horrified if my husband got in touch with his feminine side. Because I appreciate his point of view on life, like he appreciates mine.

I think my appreciation of the male POV comes from having been in a family with 3 younger brothers and the only girl in a neighborhood of at least a dozen boys.

Slight rant of my own here. This is why sometimes I get annoyed with Vox. The way he writes his game articles makes it seem like if women actually express an opinion, they are not being womanly and somehow they are dissing men. He really needs to reread the marriage passages from his Bible.

Susan said...

Almost forgot, your grandmother was a very wise woman. I would have enjoyed her company very much.

Res Ipsa said...

Susan,

The number one thing to remember when reading Vox is that he is saying EXACTLY what he has written. Nothing more and nothing less. Most normal people assume some degree of emotional context to what they are reading. Vox isn't expressing anything beyond the words and idea that he is talking about.

The higher someone is on the intelligence scale the harder it can be for them to nuance a message. When they try to anticipate other peoples reactions they get overwhelmed with all the endless possibilities and it becomes too frustrating a process.


Back on topic, Men need to be men and Women need to be women. It's supposed to be a complementary arrangement not an adversarial one.

Res Ipsa said...

Susan,

The number one thing to remember when reading Vox is that he is saying EXACTLY what he has written. Nothing more and nothing less. Most normal people assume some degree of emotional context to what they are reading. Vox isn't expressing anything beyond the words and idea that he is talking about.

The higher someone is on the intelligence scale the harder it can be for them to nuance a message. When they try to anticipate other peoples reactions they get overwhelmed with all the endless possibilities and it becomes too frustrating a process.


Back on topic, Men need to be men and Women need to be women. It's supposed to be a complementary arrangement not an adversarial one.

Res Ipsa said...

Susan,

The number one thing to remember when reading Vox is that he is saying EXACTLY what he has written. Nothing more and nothing less. Most normal people assume some degree of emotional context to what they are reading. Vox isn't expressing anything beyond the words and idea that he is talking about.

The higher someone is on the intelligence scale the harder it can be for them to nuance a message. When they try to anticipate other peoples reactions they get overwhelmed with all the endless possibilities and it becomes too frustrating a process.


Back on topic, Men need to be men and Women need to be women. It's supposed to be a complementary arrangement not an adversarial one.

Susan said...

Exactly. I love that word complimentary. And knowing that the bored and nasty women who started this ball rolling will have to face God for what they did to women.

Question for you. I truly do not mean this to sound racist at all, and feel free to edit out if you don't feel comfortable. Do you think there is some kind of significance to the fact that the founding women of the feminist movement were bored Jewish women?
When I think of the damage that these bored women have caused this country and their gender in general it really makes me angry sometimes at their husbands for not being better leaders of their homes so that they would not have gone down this path.

Res Ipsa said...

I'm not sure that race played into the topic very much. I think that at least two other factors were more important. The first being wealth and prosperity. You can't have modern feminism and the feminist movement without financial prosperity. If women were woefully oppressed they would have been too busy eking out an existence to complain about the patriarchy. Also related, the "focus group" Betty Friedan used for her "research" leading up to her book was a group of girls from Berkley around the time of their 15th college reunion. Most of these girls had gotten married and raised or nearly raised their upper middle class children. They were living a life of leisure on their husbands incomes and were bored now that their kids were middle to high school aged. Hardly representative of the "oppressed" class of women the world over.

The second and in my mind most telling point, was the history of mental illness associated with members of the feminist movement. I wish I could remember which of the early feminist book authors actually had a complete break down and was committed to a mental institution after breaking down and speaking complete gibberish during her book tour.

If "Jewishness" played a part in the founding of feminism I think it was very secondary and then probably only related so far as Jews were generally financially successful, intellectually curious, and likely to send their children to universities, where many different ideologies were being advanced. I suspect that is part of the reason for many of the Jews involved in communism as well. If I remember correctly, most of the Jews involved in the various radical "movements" of the 60's and 70's were Jewish only in heritage and were not religiously Jewish. Religiously most of these "Jews" were atheist or agnostic and were not observant of any of the requirements of the Jewish faith.