« Housewifery as a Luxury Good | Main | Incroyable! »

April 16, 2012

Things I Missed Over the Weekend...

Stacy McCain apparently linked to the Another Day, Another Victim post thusly:

Cassandra at Villanous Company does her Alpha Female b**ch-goddess workout on James Taranto, who had the temerity to offer a sympathetic view of young male existence in the post-feminist society:

...As for what inspired Cassandra to go off on Taranto, I’m not sure. Maybe my pot-stirring post yesterday put him on her radar screen. At any rate, the great thing about being a married man is that you only have to worry about keeping one woman happy — or at least happy enough that she doesn’t knife you to death in your sleep. Mrs. Other McCain just shared with me a joke her friend posted on Facebook:

“One day a long time ago, there was a woman who did not whine, nag or bitch. But that was a long time ago, and it was only for one day.”

Indeed.

It's hard to tell what it is that Stacy disagrees with in my post because, aside from the repeated personal insults, he never addresses any of the points I made. And though I hate to burst his bubble, what "put Taranto on my radar screen", as he so quaintly put it, was Memeorandum. The link's right in the first sentence of the post.

Perhaps Stacy thinks 15-17 year old boys should not stop and think about the consequences before they have sex?

Maybe he believes that a healthy respect for negative consequences is the same as being afraid of girls?

Or perhaps he disagrees that the Lefty inequality narrative posits that people who work harder, achieve more, or outearn others have done something vaguely wrong and unfair and ought to share some of their ill-gotten gains with the ambitionally-challenged?

Or maybe he thinks boys should not use condoms?

Hard to say. The one thing that does seem clear is that I am supposed to be uber outraged. I do hate to disappoint, but there's nothing (aside from a lot of irrelevant nastiness) substantive there to address.

Nice try, though :)

Posted by Cassandra at April 16, 2012 06:28 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.villainouscompany.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4133

Comments

Maybe he thinks that boys with the attitude Taranto described do not "whine, nag, or bitch," but you do. I guess it's all about the target.

Posted by: Texan99 at April 16, 2012 08:28 AM

I suspect it's all about trying to get people all stirred up :p

Or about traffic. That seems to be important.

I really don't understand the attitude though. A lot of conservatives (especially men) seem to think morality is "a girlie thing".

Girls should wait for marriage because that's the right thing to do, but boys should screw anything on two legs or four and not worry about trivialities like creating a baby they don't want to raise or support.

It's OK for men to tell women they should behave responsibly wrt sex, but if women suggest that men should do the same, we are whining, nagging, or bitching (or my personal favorite, "acting the moral scold"). Of course calling a women who has sex outside of marriage a slut is *not* moral scolding because by definition, men do not scold.

When they do it, it's just good conservatism. Too weird :)

Posted by: Cass at April 16, 2012 09:05 AM

Two things continue to confuse me. One is how difficult it is to get across the point that sex with strangers can have really unpleasant strings attached, even if you're a fancy-free unmarried male. We keep getting objections that, to me, sound like variations on the theme of "but what if the woman really disappoints your expectations?" Well, what have we been talking about? That's the message elders have been trying to get across to young women for ages: if you're not married to your sexual partner, or you marry the wrong one, you're going to find yourself in a pretty pickle when pregnancy comes along, as it so often does. And yet when we make the point that guys also might want to think twice about the risks, we still hear, "But what if it's the woman who is at fault?" Well, what if it is? Why else is a woman in the ditch when lets a guy knock her up and then finds out he's not the responsible type? When you're close enough to someone to make a baby, his or her failings become your inescapable problem.

The other mystery to me is, why all the angst on behalf of vulnerable boys just now? Women thoroughly internalized long ago that casual sex is risky, and yet it strikes a lot of men as intolerable news today. The only changes I can see are

(1) paternity testing means it's easier for the father to be as indisputably "caught" as the mother -- no matter how casual the encounter and no matter how strong the urge to pretend he didn't have (exclusive) sexual relations with that woman, and

(2) contraception and abortion have made it seem like pregnancy is always entirely avoidable, so if the woman doesn't choose to avoid it, then why should the man have to worry?

Reason number two is at least internally consistent for a liberal man, but I don't understand it in a conservative one. Reason number one doesn't engage my compassion.

Posted by: Texan99 at April 16, 2012 09:24 AM

That's the message elders have been trying to get across to young women for ages: if you're not married to your sexual partner, or you marry the wrong one, you're going to find yourself in a pretty pickle when pregnancy comes along, as it so often does. And yet when we make the point that guys also might want to think twice about the risks, we still hear, "But what if it's the woman who is at fault?"

T99, you ignorant slut :)

This is why double standards come in handy. When a woman gets involved with a man who turns out to be a user or a cad, the correct response is, "Well, what did she expect? She passed up a nice boy for a player and paid the price."

Of course the reverse is *never* true - that man who got involved with a woman who cheats or takes him to the cleaners is not told, "Well, what did he expect? He passed up a nice woman for a user and paid the price."

Instead, we hear idiotic rants that generally start, "All women..." or my personal favorite, "All American women..." :p

The other mystery to me is, why all the angst on behalf of vulnerable boys just now? Women thoroughly internalized long ago that casual sex is risky, and yet it strikes a lot of men as intolerable news today.

Because women formerly had few legal protections, men used to be able to shift the consequences of their mistakes onto others easily. Now, it's harder.

I understand the concern wrt to the financial consequences of divorce, but ironically, as more and more women out-earn their husbands they are being forced to pay alimony to their lesser earning spouses.

I would be more sympathetic if I saw more specific suggestions as to how the laws should be changed. That's what's needed for a serious discussion.

Bemoaning the fact that decisions have consequences strikes me as beyond stupid, especially for conservatives. People need to act like adults and if they're not adults yet, they should probably not be having sex. Seems like a no brainer, but apparently taking sides in the gender wars is more important than thinking about right and wrong or exercising personal responsibility.

Posted by: Cass at April 16, 2012 10:06 AM

Cassandra at Villanous Company does her Alpha Female b**ch-goddess workout....

There, there. You can be my Alpha Female b**ch-goddess friend any time. Don't you worry your pretty little head about it.

On the other hand, the double standard is an absolute necessity in some circles. As DC Circuit Judge Janice Rogers Brown wrote in an otherwise wholly unrelated venue, Civil society, "once it grows addicted to redistribution, changes its character and comes to require the state to 'feed its habit.'" This redistribution demands double standards, else there's no justification for preferring one group--the redistributee--over another group--the government's victims. And don't lose sight of the fact that the redistribution is as addictive for the redistributors as it is for the redistributees.

Women carry the burden in the present case because women carry the life. Thus, the double standard says, "It's all your responsibility." It's a very short step from there to assert, "And by the way, it's all your fault, too." And the escape from this particular responsibility is especially addictive given the rush from the "toke" with the avoidance of the outcome.

Eric Hines

Posted by: E Hines at April 16, 2012 10:53 AM

I read McCain's column and wondered if you would stumble upon it.

Are you guys gonna have another big dust-up??

This could be fun. {:^)> (that's my goatee)

By the way, I thought he was way off base (typical man!!) , but to comment there, you have to log into Facebook or some other socialist non-sense.

Posted by: Don Brouhaha at April 16, 2012 12:58 PM

You can be my Alpha Female b**ch-goddess friend any time. Don't you worry your pretty little head about it.

*snort*

Maybe I should start adding those things to my sidebar :) The Janice Rogers-Brown quote is great - I love that woman.

Don, someone emailed me the link. Otherwise, I would have remained as blissfully clueless (and sadly, insufficiently outraged ) as I usually am :p

Posted by: Cass at April 16, 2012 02:06 PM

"Cassandra at Villanous Company does her Alpha Female b**ch-goddess workout..."

And you wondered if those lessons you took while the Unit was deployed were worth the price of admission.
pshah!

0>;~}

Posted by: DL Sly at April 16, 2012 02:56 PM

Yanno, I'm beginning to grow downright fond of that phrase :)

Posted by: Cassandra at April 17, 2012 06:09 AM

I can't find it now but I followed a link from the Bookworm Room to a blog with a picture of a scowling Scarlett O'Hara and the caption, "B***h, please."

And speaking of masthead pictures, did you choose the "Gay Justice Roberts" picture because his posture reminded you of your own masthead icon?

Posted by: Texan99 at April 17, 2012 09:26 AM

Heh... you'll have to ask spd about that one :p

No matter how many times I look at it, it's still funny.

Posted by: Cass at April 17, 2012 09:41 AM

Once again, my ever favorite "MAN HATING FEMINAZI" accusation rears its ludicrous head. It'd be insulting, I suppose, were it not so utterly risible.

Posted by: MikeD at April 17, 2012 02:49 PM

Well, as I read somewhere a few days ago, you ignorant menfolk are just too dumb to realize the many ways you're being oppressed by the Matriarchy :p

*sigh*

Posted by: Cass at April 18, 2012 05:52 AM

"Well, as I read somewhere a few days ago, you ignorant menfolk are just too dumb to realize the many ways you're being oppressed by the Matriarchy :p"
And mostly lovin' every minute. Must mean that some of us is 'parently too ig'nernt to even realize weez oppressed.

*scratches head and wonders aloud* Is there a Jesse Jackson/Al Sharpton counterpart to champion the Oppressed Male? A prophet who can lead us out of the land of Canaan, and away from those wickedly soft and sweet smellin' oppressors with frilly panties who mend us and defends us?

Sure is a tough assignment for the average knuckle-dragging, Neanderthal curmudgeon to keep up to date on the gender war skirmishes with these days.

Posted by: bthun at April 18, 2012 07:36 AM

What about that skanky PUA guy with the blog? Isn't that pretty much his schtick?

Posted by: Texan99 at April 18, 2012 08:42 AM

The "problem", bthun, is that you and I (and almost all of the male Company here) are "white knights" who have been "shamed" into behaving in "self punishing" ways. It must really be tiring to believe that crap.

Posted by: MikeD at April 18, 2012 09:06 AM

"What about that skanky PUA guy with the blog?"
Beats me.

To confess my detachment from current events in the Gender Wars, I had no idea what the PUA acronym stood for before I read about it either here or over at Grim's Hall. So if I've ever visited the site, it was following a link from either VC or Grim's Hall in the last year or so.

My ignorance of the PUA vermin is probably a good thing considering how much h3!! I put my daughter's male acquaintances through when the girls were living at home, attending high school/University, dating or just "hanging around".

A character flaw on my part I know, but I'm not a cool dad, so there ya go.

"The "problem", bthun, is that you and I (and almost all of the male Company here) are "white knights" who have been "shamed" into behaving in "self punishing" ways. It must really be tiring to believe that crap."
Too kind Mike. I'm just a knuckle-dragger from a bygone era who is not terribly tolerant of BS. However, I was lucky enough to be instructed early on by white knights like the old man and those in his generation.

Posted by: bthun at April 18, 2012 09:14 AM

Post a comment

To reduce comment spam, comments on older posts are put into moderation 5 days after the last activity. Comments with more than one link also go into moderation. If you don't see your comment after posting it, try refreshing the screen. If you still don't see it, your comment is probably in the moderation queue.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)