This is a great summation of Ted Cruz, from the comments to Gail Collins' equally good opinion piece about him.
Ted Cruz in his level of rudeness
Attained a new record in crudeness,
A didactic display
In his Tea Party way
Of a cortex denuded of shrewdness
Limericks. Gotta love 'em.
Showing posts with label alpha male jackasses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alpha male jackasses. Show all posts
March 17, 2013
February 26, 2013
Don 't Go Away Mad, Just Go Away
Seth MacFarlane says he won't return as Oscars host
Please. Pretty please, I beg thee, and implore Yahweh, Jesus, Buddha, Zeus, Allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Q, and whatever deities and supernatural beings exist in any dimension available, to make this happen.
Please. Pretty please, I beg thee, and implore Yahweh, Jesus, Buddha, Zeus, Allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Q, and whatever deities and supernatural beings exist in any dimension available, to make this happen.
September 17, 2012
Mitt Romney Unmasked
"I'm an uncaring asshole and proud of it." ~Chuck Palahniuk
Feel the contempt. Taste the scorn.
America, do you really want to vote for this soulless, contemptible prick?
Feel the contempt. Taste the scorn.
America, do you really want to vote for this soulless, contemptible prick?
February 23, 2012
"Persecution is a tribute the great must always pay"
"Opposition may become sweet to a man when he has christened it persecution." ~George Eliot
After watching last night's CNN Republican debate, I can only conclude that the modern-day Republican Party is of besieged* white males, by besieged white males, and for besieged white males.
No one else need apply.
(*Besieged by whom? You decide.)
After watching last night's CNN Republican debate, I can only conclude that the modern-day Republican Party is of besieged* white males, by besieged white males, and for besieged white males.
No one else need apply.
(*Besieged by whom? You decide.)
June 16, 2011
Insults and Injuries
Romney: I'm Also Unemployed
Dude, you're a multimillionaire. You could be unemployed the rest of your frakking life and never have a clue what real unemployed people go through.
What a jackass.
Dude, you're a multimillionaire. You could be unemployed the rest of your frakking life and never have a clue what real unemployed people go through.
What a jackass.
June 11, 2011
I Agree With This
From Talking Points Memo:
It's not so much that Weiner didn't screw up royally, they say. It's that they say it's just not that big a deal, and making it into one falls into a Republican trap. And, besides, they say, as long as Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is still walking the halls of the Capitol, why should the left be forced to lose one of its most ardent supporters?
Look, folks, Weiner effed up. Get over it. We have a Republican party (working hand-in-hand with Fake Noise) trying to destroy this country, and we don't have time for this nonsense.
It's not so much that Weiner didn't screw up royally, they say. It's that they say it's just not that big a deal, and making it into one falls into a Republican trap. And, besides, they say, as long as Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is still walking the halls of the Capitol, why should the left be forced to lose one of its most ardent supporters?
Look, folks, Weiner effed up. Get over it. We have a Republican party (working hand-in-hand with Fake Noise) trying to destroy this country, and we don't have time for this nonsense.
October 4, 2010
We're All Out of Love
Jeez, what a teetotal prick.
Some high- (or low-) lights:
I blame Air Supply.
And the entire male cast of Friends.
As a gender, the modern man has been socialized into bumbling submission.
Doting, indecisive and generally wimpy, too many of us have lost the ancient protocols of manhood.
Hey, I like Air Supply. I also like men (and more than that, persons) who are strong enough to be vulnerable; who admit they can be hurt; and who, because they recognize their own vulnerability, are considerate of other people's feelings. And if losing the "ancient protocols of manhood" means leaving behind the vicious patriarchal cycle of control and domination, then good riddance.
Consider the basic proposition posed by Toronto writer Elliott Katz in his self-help guide for the whipped male called Being the Strong Man A Woman Wants: Our fathers, bewildered by the feminist revolution, have failed to hand down the kind of testosterone-laced wisdom that defined our gender throughout history.
"Testosterone-laced?" That sounds rather poisonous, doesn't it? Just because it supposedly "defined our gender throughout history" doesn't make it right.
And a recent essay in The Atlantic — provocatively titled “The End of Men” — reports that after being the dominant sex since the dawn of time, “that is changing — and with shocking speed.”
This role reversal – including the female eclipse of men in universities and the professional world — is all part of the bruising being sustained by the modern male ego.
You mean the "privileged" sex, don't you? For those whose entire self-worth is wrapped up in their sense of privilege, there's nothing more terrifying than its loss. There's nothing more frightening than viewing the entire world as a zero-sum game, where if others gain you inevitably lose.
Except you don't have to view the world in that way. A truly secure person rejoices in the elevation of others, knowing it doesn't take anything away from himself. A truly secure person doesn't view marriage and relationships as a battle of wills, where someone has to take charge. A secure person knows the "modern male ego" is a figment of John Wayne's imagination, and strives to put childish things behind him.
Maturity: try it sometime. Betcha your wife will like you better, too.
Some high- (or low-) lights:
I blame Air Supply.
And the entire male cast of Friends.
As a gender, the modern man has been socialized into bumbling submission.
Doting, indecisive and generally wimpy, too many of us have lost the ancient protocols of manhood.
Hey, I like Air Supply. I also like men (and more than that, persons) who are strong enough to be vulnerable; who admit they can be hurt; and who, because they recognize their own vulnerability, are considerate of other people's feelings. And if losing the "ancient protocols of manhood" means leaving behind the vicious patriarchal cycle of control and domination, then good riddance.
Consider the basic proposition posed by Toronto writer Elliott Katz in his self-help guide for the whipped male called Being the Strong Man A Woman Wants: Our fathers, bewildered by the feminist revolution, have failed to hand down the kind of testosterone-laced wisdom that defined our gender throughout history.
"Testosterone-laced?" That sounds rather poisonous, doesn't it? Just because it supposedly "defined our gender throughout history" doesn't make it right.
And a recent essay in The Atlantic — provocatively titled “The End of Men” — reports that after being the dominant sex since the dawn of time, “that is changing — and with shocking speed.”
This role reversal – including the female eclipse of men in universities and the professional world — is all part of the bruising being sustained by the modern male ego.
You mean the "privileged" sex, don't you? For those whose entire self-worth is wrapped up in their sense of privilege, there's nothing more terrifying than its loss. There's nothing more frightening than viewing the entire world as a zero-sum game, where if others gain you inevitably lose.
Except you don't have to view the world in that way. A truly secure person rejoices in the elevation of others, knowing it doesn't take anything away from himself. A truly secure person doesn't view marriage and relationships as a battle of wills, where someone has to take charge. A secure person knows the "modern male ego" is a figment of John Wayne's imagination, and strives to put childish things behind him.
Maturity: try it sometime. Betcha your wife will like you better, too.
July 22, 2007
It's WTF Time, Kidlets!!
I guess I should know better than to take potshots like this, but the target is so big, stupid, crude and easy that I couldn't resist.
(The only good thing about the site is that it hasn't been updated--as far as I could tell--since 2000. Maybe the chauvinist piglet's long-suffering wife finally had enough of him and upended a shotgun in his face.)
The axioms of life subscribed to at the Chauvinist Corner
1. A man must never hit a woman.
Until she gets sufficiently uppity.
2. A man must not stand by and allow a woman to be attacked by another man.
Unless she puts on a short skirt and turns into a slut. Then it's a free-for-all.
3. A marriage is for life.
No matter how miserable that woman's life becomes.
4. A man should provide the entire support for his family.
Even if he becomes disabled, gets cancer or dies.
5. A man must pledge his life to protect his family from physical, emotional and financial harm.
One wonders which would actually be more harmful--the "threat" or the "protection."
6. A wife must be home and supervising minor children anytime that the children are not in school.
Because, God knows, anyone with a penis is incapable of doing it.
7. Sex must occur only inside of a marriage.
And if she says no he'll just take it anyway.
8. A man must benevolently rule his own house.
A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
9. A man must instill respect into his children for their mother and provide disciplinary support for her motherly leadership.
Because those vaunted "motherly leadership" qualities just work for the kids--they can't be applied to the real world, y'know.
10. A lady must be treated with respect by a man.
True respect involves supporting her in whatever she wants to do.
11. A woman is out of place in business, and if she is there, a woman should not be placed in authority over a man.
No matter how stupid and backward the man is, as seen by this idiotic diatribe.
Truly, this is the kind of jackass I fervently hope will grow old alone.
(Via Kichike.)
(The only good thing about the site is that it hasn't been updated--as far as I could tell--since 2000. Maybe the chauvinist piglet's long-suffering wife finally had enough of him and upended a shotgun in his face.)
The axioms of life subscribed to at the Chauvinist Corner
1. A man must never hit a woman.
Until she gets sufficiently uppity.
2. A man must not stand by and allow a woman to be attacked by another man.
Unless she puts on a short skirt and turns into a slut. Then it's a free-for-all.
3. A marriage is for life.
No matter how miserable that woman's life becomes.
4. A man should provide the entire support for his family.
Even if he becomes disabled, gets cancer or dies.
5. A man must pledge his life to protect his family from physical, emotional and financial harm.
One wonders which would actually be more harmful--the "threat" or the "protection."
6. A wife must be home and supervising minor children anytime that the children are not in school.
Because, God knows, anyone with a penis is incapable of doing it.
7. Sex must occur only inside of a marriage.
And if she says no he'll just take it anyway.
8. A man must benevolently rule his own house.
A benevolent dictator is still a dictator.
9. A man must instill respect into his children for their mother and provide disciplinary support for her motherly leadership.
Because those vaunted "motherly leadership" qualities just work for the kids--they can't be applied to the real world, y'know.
10. A lady must be treated with respect by a man.
True respect involves supporting her in whatever she wants to do.
11. A woman is out of place in business, and if she is there, a woman should not be placed in authority over a man.
No matter how stupid and backward the man is, as seen by this idiotic diatribe.
Truly, this is the kind of jackass I fervently hope will grow old alone.
(Via Kichike.)
June 30, 2007
The Spermies Have It
Here we have yet another stupid, smart-ass commentary on men's potential extinction. Although, referencing the original article, it seems all the pseudo-panic is premature, to say the least--to quote a doctor discussing these synthetic sperm cells:
"Before we get too excited about this being a new form of infertility treatment, these cells cannot as yet be made into functioning sperm, so we have no idea if they can pass ‘the acid test,’ the ability to fertilize female eggs as is achieved with donor sperm in IVF treatment."
The fact that this research is at its beginning stages doesn't stop people from making wild speculations, however. Usually these speculations are mixed with a great deal of condescension, patronization and outright sexism. To quote the writer of the first article, Brian Alexander:
"I just want to know why you women are in such a rush to get rid of us. Sci-fi and fantasy literature are full of all-female societies like Wonder Woman’s home island. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd penned a friendly little book in 2005 called “Are Men Necessary?” Are you trying to give us a complex or something?"
Well, let's see, does the concept of patriarchy ring a bell? Perhaps if all males had been living for centuries under a system that treated them like:
a) property;
b) pawns on a chess board;
c) children; and
d) slaves;
--just possibly males in that position might think it a good thing to get rid of their overlords too.
He goes on to say:
"Well, strictly in terms of keeping the human species alive, you women need some of us. You just don’t need all that many of us (though we would prefer to keep that under our hats, if we wore hats). We make a glut of sperm, millions of them, so one man can spread a lot of seed.
Then create a few hundred males from the frozen semen for the next generation--it is possible to select for sex, even now--and start the process all over again. That way the more sensible gender would actually be running the planet.
Mr. Alexander ends his article with what he thinks is a joke:
"So ladies, laugh it up while you can because once those artificial eggs and the artificial womb hit the market, you’ll be buying your own dinners at Chez Francoise."
And this would be bad...why?
Thankfully, most readers of the story are no more enamored of it than I am: it's rated 2.5 out of 5 by over 1200 people.
Look, if you're going to discuss this subject, take it seriously. If any of this research pans out, it will revolutionize society, much like the birth-control pill did. An article made up of smarmy asides just makes the writer look like a jackass.
"Before we get too excited about this being a new form of infertility treatment, these cells cannot as yet be made into functioning sperm, so we have no idea if they can pass ‘the acid test,’ the ability to fertilize female eggs as is achieved with donor sperm in IVF treatment."
The fact that this research is at its beginning stages doesn't stop people from making wild speculations, however. Usually these speculations are mixed with a great deal of condescension, patronization and outright sexism. To quote the writer of the first article, Brian Alexander:
"I just want to know why you women are in such a rush to get rid of us. Sci-fi and fantasy literature are full of all-female societies like Wonder Woman’s home island. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd penned a friendly little book in 2005 called “Are Men Necessary?” Are you trying to give us a complex or something?"
Well, let's see, does the concept of patriarchy ring a bell? Perhaps if all males had been living for centuries under a system that treated them like:
a) property;
b) pawns on a chess board;
c) children; and
d) slaves;
--just possibly males in that position might think it a good thing to get rid of their overlords too.
He goes on to say:
"Well, strictly in terms of keeping the human species alive, you women need some of us. You just don’t need all that many of us (though we would prefer to keep that under our hats, if we wore hats). We make a glut of sperm, millions of them, so one man can spread a lot of seed.
Sperm banking has long been an important part of in vitro fertilization, just as bull semen is integral to dairy production. Frankly, you only need a small tribe of us guys equipped with porn magazines and plastic cups. You could feed us, groom us and give us a little exercise — pretty much like you do now."
Nah, we don't even have to go that far. Just have a few hundred males in each generation jack off--for genetic variety, you see--freeze the semen, and ship said males off-planet to explore space. They should have a great time out there, since they won't ever need to ask for directions.Then create a few hundred males from the frozen semen for the next generation--it is possible to select for sex, even now--and start the process all over again. That way the more sensible gender would actually be running the planet.
Mr. Alexander ends his article with what he thinks is a joke:
"So ladies, laugh it up while you can because once those artificial eggs and the artificial womb hit the market, you’ll be buying your own dinners at Chez Francoise."
And this would be bad...why?
Thankfully, most readers of the story are no more enamored of it than I am: it's rated 2.5 out of 5 by over 1200 people.
Look, if you're going to discuss this subject, take it seriously. If any of this research pans out, it will revolutionize society, much like the birth-control pill did. An article made up of smarmy asides just makes the writer look like a jackass.
June 3, 2007
Well, If You Have To Ask...
I hate articles like this.
Are men, like sharks, starting to be useless?
I've noticed you get these kinds of op-eds whenever a quirk of nature comes along (in this case, a female hammerhead shark who apparently gave birth without mating) that seems to cast a bad light upon the male of the species. Never mind that this parthenogenetic behavior is extremely rare, and has never been observed in mammals. Some--inevitably male--smart-ass writer just has to speculate about what this might mean for humans.
In this case, the writer is throwing out a list of whiny, supposed-to-be-funny "reasons" why men shouldn't be cast aside just yet. To wit:
We can lift really heavy things.
We look so cool smoking a pipe.
We can cage fight. (Immediately retracted.)
We are super good at starting wars.
We are way awesome at loud noises.
We can eat like crazy.
If these are all the reasons he can come up with, one wonders why he, as a male, is still around to write about them.
Articles like these are invariably smug, condescending as all hell, and generally sexist to boot. For instance, under the "starting wars" section, he expands his thought as follows:
These heathens can't be reasoned with and must not be appeased. Women, or lesser males, may be tempted to talk with the savages, or think there's a middle ground of co-existence. Yeah, right..and Melinda was the best singer on American Idol (not that I watch it). [Oh really? Then how'd you know her name, or the fact that it was generally conceded that technically, she was Idol's best singer?]
Ugh. Despite his protests, obviously this is someone suffering from "Alpha Male" syndrome. He's trying to laugh and joke his way out of it, but he's sure not succeeding. Look how women and "lesser males" (those who actually have consideration for others' feelings) are linked in his mind. Notice how those old words "heathen" and "savages" are so lightly tossed about. Intentionally or not, he reminded me of the era when those words were used to such devastating effect against Native Americans.
Finally, he seems to have fallen prey to Male Entitlement Syndrome--a hidden (or sometimes not-so-hidden) frustration that the attention is not always on the menz:
If the most terrifying creatures alive--think Shark Week--are nothing more than useless relics, we may as well order up a no-whip, hazelnut, non-fat chai and turn on Desperate Housewives. The end can't be far away.
O horrors! A fate worse than death.
Perhaps this was intended to be a parody. It didn't turn out that way, at least for me. It would have come across far better had the writer acknowledged the fact of the "macho landscape," tried to explain it, and attempted to argue why men need to dismantle society's expectations of "Alpha Males."
Then, perhaps, he could have accomplished something.
Are men, like sharks, starting to be useless?
I've noticed you get these kinds of op-eds whenever a quirk of nature comes along (in this case, a female hammerhead shark who apparently gave birth without mating) that seems to cast a bad light upon the male of the species. Never mind that this parthenogenetic behavior is extremely rare, and has never been observed in mammals. Some--inevitably male--smart-ass writer just has to speculate about what this might mean for humans.
In this case, the writer is throwing out a list of whiny, supposed-to-be-funny "reasons" why men shouldn't be cast aside just yet. To wit:
We can lift really heavy things.
We look so cool smoking a pipe.
We can cage fight. (Immediately retracted.)
We are super good at starting wars.
We are way awesome at loud noises.
We can eat like crazy.
If these are all the reasons he can come up with, one wonders why he, as a male, is still around to write about them.
Articles like these are invariably smug, condescending as all hell, and generally sexist to boot. For instance, under the "starting wars" section, he expands his thought as follows:
These heathens can't be reasoned with and must not be appeased. Women, or lesser males, may be tempted to talk with the savages, or think there's a middle ground of co-existence. Yeah, right..and Melinda was the best singer on American Idol (not that I watch it). [Oh really? Then how'd you know her name, or the fact that it was generally conceded that technically, she was Idol's best singer?]
Lock and load, we say! If not, prepare to polka all night, ladies.
Ugh. Despite his protests, obviously this is someone suffering from "Alpha Male" syndrome. He's trying to laugh and joke his way out of it, but he's sure not succeeding. Look how women and "lesser males" (those who actually have consideration for others' feelings) are linked in his mind. Notice how those old words "heathen" and "savages" are so lightly tossed about. Intentionally or not, he reminded me of the era when those words were used to such devastating effect against Native Americans.
Finally, he seems to have fallen prey to Male Entitlement Syndrome--a hidden (or sometimes not-so-hidden) frustration that the attention is not always on the menz:
If the most terrifying creatures alive--think Shark Week--are nothing more than useless relics, we may as well order up a no-whip, hazelnut, non-fat chai and turn on Desperate Housewives. The end can't be far away.
O horrors! A fate worse than death.
Perhaps this was intended to be a parody. It didn't turn out that way, at least for me. It would have come across far better had the writer acknowledged the fact of the "macho landscape," tried to explain it, and attempted to argue why men need to dismantle society's expectations of "Alpha Males."
Then, perhaps, he could have accomplished something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)