| Jason! ( @ 2008-01-30 15:17:00 |
After all these years...
Some women still figure it's ok to blame all their unhappiness on men.
I think what bugs me the most about this is that there's an implication that settling down, marrying, and spawning is still the thing that must be done and that men (and she makes no bones about saying this is a problem with all men) are only delaying the inevitable wife, child and mortgage. That future is something that these men need to accept in order to be mature and grow up.
What. The. Fuck.
Seriously? I fail to see the problem with her "man-child". Her whole argument rests on the assumption that what they are, right now isn't good enough. Who is she to say that? Good enough for whom? If she's frustrated with the class of guys she meets (which seems to be the whole thrust of this article. I mean, really, complaining about sports, beer, and fart jokes is so... antique! Her only nod to these modern times is video games), then, well, SUCKS TO BE HER. The guys she describes seem to be fine, they're not trying to be anyone else, and apparently enough women think that's just fine that these "man-children" don't seem to lack for female companionship (although those women are in the minority, and she stops just short of denigrating them).
Looking around, I see plenty of people hooking up and having kids, so I don't believe that there's a gross shortage of men interested in her official future, but I also don't believe that that's the future men (and women) must accept in order to become adults. That's an imaginary 1950's way of thinking, and it shows the real message in her thesis: It's not ok to be single. It's not ok to be queer. It's not ok to be childless. It's not ok to rent. It's not ok to watch sports, laugh at fart jokes, and enjoy explosions. It's not ok to live together without being married. It's especially not ok for women to be in any of these camps. The men, poor sods that they are, would wallow pig-like, in adolescent filth for all eternity if it wasn't for us. Conform. Conform. Conform.
And it's that message that's sadder than any airbrushed Maxim cover.
You've come a long way, baby.
PS: There's a very real concern of mine about these mythical "man-children" in the workplace. If, indeed, this genus of men really does exist, they'll have a profound inability to relate to women in a professional manner. This isn't a _new_ problem, per se, it's just a different twist on the same old problem that some men apparently have treating women like people. However, I'm surprised that her article doesn't mention it at all. Well, ok, not really.
Some women still figure it's ok to blame all their unhappiness on men.
I think what bugs me the most about this is that there's an implication that settling down, marrying, and spawning is still the thing that must be done and that men (and she makes no bones about saying this is a problem with all men) are only delaying the inevitable wife, child and mortgage. That future is something that these men need to accept in order to be mature and grow up.
What. The. Fuck.
Seriously? I fail to see the problem with her "man-child". Her whole argument rests on the assumption that what they are, right now isn't good enough. Who is she to say that? Good enough for whom? If she's frustrated with the class of guys she meets (which seems to be the whole thrust of this article. I mean, really, complaining about sports, beer, and fart jokes is so... antique! Her only nod to these modern times is video games), then, well, SUCKS TO BE HER. The guys she describes seem to be fine, they're not trying to be anyone else, and apparently enough women think that's just fine that these "man-children" don't seem to lack for female companionship (although those women are in the minority, and she stops just short of denigrating them).
Looking around, I see plenty of people hooking up and having kids, so I don't believe that there's a gross shortage of men interested in her official future, but I also don't believe that that's the future men (and women) must accept in order to become adults. That's an imaginary 1950's way of thinking, and it shows the real message in her thesis: It's not ok to be single. It's not ok to be queer. It's not ok to be childless. It's not ok to rent. It's not ok to watch sports, laugh at fart jokes, and enjoy explosions. It's not ok to live together without being married. It's especially not ok for women to be in any of these camps. The men, poor sods that they are, would wallow pig-like, in adolescent filth for all eternity if it wasn't for us. Conform. Conform. Conform.
And it's that message that's sadder than any airbrushed Maxim cover.
You've come a long way, baby.
PS: There's a very real concern of mine about these mythical "man-children" in the workplace. If, indeed, this genus of men really does exist, they'll have a profound inability to relate to women in a professional manner. This isn't a _new_ problem, per se, it's just a different twist on the same old problem that some men apparently have treating women like people. However, I'm surprised that her article doesn't mention it at all. Well, ok, not really.