alto« A Tip For The Butch Obssessed »
Before you go about reclaiming the "masculine warrior God within", maybe an awareness of what the fuck that is might prove helpful to your rabid pursuit.
Let me back up here. Anyone who has been blogging for even a moderate length of time, has no doubt had the very common experience of that little voice in the back of ones head that occasionally says, "now may not be the best time for that specific little tirade Skippy". Referring of course, to the good sense one should exercise when they have been made aware that if they engage the rant that is brewing in their head, there exists a real risk of communicating less than objective opinion on an issue.
Though in my case, my lengthy history of selective auditory skill when it comes to those little voices, makes the issue moot to begin with. Therefore caution has been thrown to the wind and I need to offer a few thoughts on the latest author to come out of his pidley little gay community studio and offer his hateful screed to the world at large. If you are sensing I am not a fan, hey, we're in sync.
In that case, I will go out on a limb and offer an opinion on a book I have yet to even read. Correction, a book I have yet to read, and a book that also will never grace the entrance to my home, let alone have me pay one more ounce of attention to its bigoted howlings. Here we are talking about first time "author" Jack Malebranche. Now, I'm sure Jack is a really swell guy, and if he has found an identity that grooves for him, I say great! Anything is better than his misguided dalliance with the ill conceived vocation of Satanic minister, but that is all in the past. Supposedly, anyway.
But....for the love of God, if I hear one more nerdy little gay man publicly embrace his masculine awareness via a direct condemnation and derision of another's, I swear my head is going to spontaneously fucking explode!
But let's cover the usual bases first, shall we. It's certainly not that I reject masculinity. Indeed, I personally embody many traits of what we currently define as traditionally masculine. And no, I will not take a compliment, nor will I make an excuse for the trait. It is what it is, and that is simply an affectation. No more, no less. And whether it is a fluke, or perhaps a result of a lack of specific reliance on said trait, call me crazy, but I'm just not all that bloody concerned with how individual men come to know, or not know, their own specific relationship to or with traditional masculinity.
So, why would the rantings of a guy like Jack burn my ass as much as they do? Simply put, men like Jack lack an ability to exist and be comfortable in their own skin. It's as if a sense of their own masculine identification, is somehow garnered through a concurrent need to admonish others perceived masculine deficits.
Now I'll be honest, I have not read the book, nor do I intend to. Therefore any direct criticism of his thesis would be unfair. But really, consider that a book that calls itself, Androphillia: Rejecting The Gay Identity and Reclaiming Ones Personal Masculinity, and is using the following example as an "exemplary review",Men who love other men have little if nothing in common with lesbians, transvestites, transsexuals, and all of the other "under-dogs" that are huddled under the ever-growing GLBTQ umbrella. We are encouraged to seek out examples of exemplary manhood in the men in our lives and to build ourselves up as men of honor and integrity.
One doesn't need to read that far to realize they are headed into one nasty swamp pit of internalized homophobia. And I will go as far as to say that it seems to be a trait among similar individuals in the gay community, that when advocating an intense focus be placed on masculinity, more often than not, those views are stemming from an obvious insecurity around their own personal deportment, a disgust with "gay culture", and always, very entrenched misogynist beliefs.
So Jack, babe; if you want to butch it up, butch it up. But some things really are better practiced solo. So, when you think you have it, without resorting to the grunting word vomit against "the queens", please, take the following advice. Dude, do a better accuracy check than you did last time, as just between you and me, you are coming across as more than a tad glaring.
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (34)
Okay I really have to say, not only can you rip a new one, but you always seem to do it with this intelligent and cool, smooth slice and dice. You are the he 007 of social evisceration! Tehe!
Seriously though, I have heard of that guy and seen his comments on some of the sites. What a fucking tool!
Hi,
You have a very nice blog. I just voted for it for Bloggers Choice Awards
Could you please return the favor at:
http://www.bloggerschoiceawards.com/blogs/show/21620
Thanks,
SpEdLaw2
Isn't life so much easier with out the little gray areas getting in the way of understanding human nature? Who in the hell needs diversity when we can lump people far more easily into acceptable or unacceptable, with a single judgment of an ill defined trait like "masculinity"? Pride, after all, comes from the ability to put a trait you desire or exemplify on a pedestal, and then ripping all those apart who don't measure up in order to elevate your love of self, right? Acceptance and building up of a community, having pride as a result of overcoming years of hostility directed at you from not measuring up to other people's concept of the norm, is all just wishy washy progressive bullshit. Right Jack? Seriously folks, who has the time or fucking energy to take people as they come, get to know and understand them beyond the initial impression of their deportment, and THEN try to create a caste system that properly puts them in their place? Sheesh.
Dear me Jack, I think the lady doth protest too much..
What the hell is it with these guys? Though I suppose the "Rev. Malebranche", minister in the Church of Satan, should say it all.
I kid you not, I looked the dark knight up on google!
Girls stop it! Don't be a nasty swishy queen.
Al, gift and second coming to the homosexual masses is standing up for us. We have to be thankful that Mr. PERFECT is going out on a limb for us girls! Because he's putting a positive-sounding spin on effeminacy. It’s like he’s saying, "I don’t call us swishing and prancing and lisping and affected, and sick and deviant and fucked up, that’s not nice, I think we should be called merry, jolly, and brightly colored.
Come on, I’m thinking of it that way, so therefore it is. I, Al, have decred that is the way it must be....agree or risk banishment from my online home.
Hey jockstud26. Cool name, If I didn't know any better I was thinking you might be telling us something about your perceived virility. I'm sure you fuck like the energizer bunny.
But more to the point, your rant above is about what I'd expect from a mouth breather like you. Guess you really told me huh? Though the best part is the web site you link to. "Straight acting.com???" That just says it all precious, it really does!
Al! Have some manners buddy. "Jockstud26" is a highly skilled athlete you know. He's the best damn male synchronized swimmer going to the Olympics. Why he's as butch as Toler Cranston don't you know! You and I could only hope to be as good as he is!
Fems are to the gay community what the uncle tom kiss asses are to the blacks!!!! Run em over by a bunch of busses. Cause a real mens bar aint got know cheese and crackers fuckers!!!!
Anonymous, what a truly original name.
I think this calls for the scene I love to invoke when dealing with a true and complete loon.
"Come on Shelby honey, drink your juice. That's it pretty girl, drink your juice Shelby!"
um, "men's" not "mens", and "no", not "know". Enough said.
sigh...good thing all those homophobes distinguish between the butch, masculine, straight acting gays and the feminine, swishy, flamey ones. Because we all know the gays who behave correctly get the best shifts in the field and get to live in the masters mansion.
I'll take the freaks and dykes and queers and drag queens and nerds and wimps and outcasts any day over these goosestepping syncophants.
"First they came..."
'Nuff said.
Sean you fucking hypocrite. Look at you, look at Al, look at your husband, look at at Tater, fuck look at any of the bearish fucking clones on this site who stand up for the freaks! Don't that seem weird to you? You guys are handsome and masculine FAKERS! It not human nature to stand up for what is so diferent than youself. FUCKING HYPOCRITES, all of ya!!!
JS,
you are truly a vile and pathetic example of self loathing fag. That you dare to call people you have absolutely no knowledge of, hypocrites, simply points out the fact that you are an ill reared, lips move when you read, idiot of the basest nature. I have never discriminated against my people based on conformity to a masculine or feminine ideal, and I have friends from just about every walk of life (with the exception of bigoted, narrow minded douche bags like you). Enjoy your straight acting lifestyle, I'm sure it provides you with the needed affirmation of masculinity you so hopelessly need. I am sorry you were raised in an environment that shamed you based on your shortcomings, and that those sad feelings have manifested themselves in your current beliefs. You are cheating yourself of the ability to know people with far more courage and integrity than those you surround yourself with.
I really don't take great amounts of pleasure in the usual ways which men like this (Jack as well as jockstud) are emasculated for their obvious sexism and clear discomfort with the sense of their own maleness, but....I bet this idiot has yet to find his cock it is no doubt so small. What an utterly repulsive creep!
I don't give two craps what he looks like, because Al's opinions make him be about as masculine as pihil Donahue or Alan Alda. and if you are confused that is not to masculine people!
Hi RealSanDiegoWoman,
I am assuming that you view myself as comparable to Alan Alda and Phil Donahue in terms of masculine attribute, is in some way an insult?
Hmm, interesting as you have referenced two men that if I was to think of attributes that for me define a masculine male, both gentlemen would have many of those attributes in abundance. So, even though it was not your intention, thanks for the compliment!
Have a great day.
You rant so eloquently.
You also have an interesting group of commenters.
"...And I will go as far as to say that it seems to be a trait among similar individuals in the gay community, that when advocating an intense focus be placed on masculinity, more often than not, those views are stemming from an obvious insecurity around their own personal deportment, a disgust with "gay culture", and always, very entrenched misogynist beliefs." - Al
=============================================
Bingo! I have often thought many of the brotherhood have no clear idea what it means to be masculine if they need to act it out. It certainly isn't the puffed up image of John Wayne. Those who have to act butch are just that, an act rather boring in my opinion.
Well, beings that you haven't even read the book and seem to know next to nothing about what Jack is really saying, your words are pretty damned worthless.
Also you thinking of a masculine homo as "just being butch" instead of "just being a regular guy" is very, VERY telling.
You can continue worshipping weakness all that you like. The rest of us will follow a more productive path.
Interesting Jake. You managed to completely misinterpret literally everything I was saying.
"Also you thinking of a masculine homo as "just being butch" instead of "just being a regular guy" is very, VERY telling."
I was referring to the tightly limited and constraining ideas behind what makes up traditional masculinity as our North American culture views it. 'Butch' beyond an intended reference to the whole gay put on masculine drag obsession, was meant to be taken as a less than complimentary label. And what, exactly, specifically, is "very, VERY telling"?
But to clarify, in terms of physical presentation, some guys, you are right, are "just being a regular guy", some are being "a nelly queen" as others might say, some are just being themselves, as I might say.
Though I need to ask you what site and article you pulled "worshiping weakness" out of, as it clearly was not this one.
What is so constricting about masculinity? That it wishes to cultivate strength? As far as I'm concerned strength (in all of its guises - physical and mental) is the most important part of masculinity and to distance yourself from that is kind of...pathetic. It's also kind of like worshipping weakness.
Just to clarify, because I know this will be brought up, that is not a dig on women. Strength may not be as central to femininity as it is to masculinity, but I think everybody values a little strength in both men and women.
I really haven't seen much of the "gay masculine drag obsession." What I see much more if is a "gay feminine-bitch drag obsession." Sure, at some gay parades there are guys dressed up as cops and firefighters...but they still prance around like little girls.
Alright, "you thinking of a masculine homo as "just being butch" instead of "just being a regular guy" is very, VERY telling" because it sound like you don't believe that a homosexual man can be just a regular guy without "butching it up" or faking it. Of course you already address that and I think it's a step in the right direction, but I don't know what the hell a nelly queen is and I'm not looking into it.
Have a good one.
I find it more than a bit funny that the same people claiming to support "equality" and a "live-and-let-live" mentality are the same people rabidly attacking anyone for having a moral code -- even when they've never even bothered to take a single look at said code. I really have to avert my eyes in awe and respect to the sheer narcissism you show here, Al, by ranting without any rhyme or reason against a book you yourself admit you know nothing about. I'm forced to ask: if you haven't even read past the damn title, how do you think you have anything of worth to say about it? Oh, that's right -- the gay gestapo has decreed what opinions you may and may not hold, so you already know which books to burn-on-sight.
What I also find amusing is the utter hypocrisy you've made us all bear witness to. You claim that you don't mind it if a dude likes his men like he likes his coffee (i.e. strong), but as soon as you notice that anyone doesn't share your flimsy, relativistic view on what makes a man, you call him "self-hating" and "straight-acting." How tolerant. Or, what's the better word? Oh, yeah: how gay.
The idiocy of this post goes even beyond your tendency to launch into vitriolic, irrational attacks against anyone different from you. Subjectivism pretty much pervades your every word. Like I pointed out earlier, a "code of morals" is off-limits to you and yours, because morality requires that you consider certain things or lifestyles anathema, and certain things virtuous. But that would mean you'd have to actually come to objective conclusions that extend beyond your simple-minded hedonism, i.e. what's "hot" and what's "not." It seems what you hate about "Androphilia" isn't that you've "discovered," through your magical and Gnostic ability to divine the exact nature of a book's author without ever having read said book, that Mr. Malebranche is unable to "be comfortable in [his] own skin" (as what, a drama queen?); rather, you don't "hate" the book at all. You have an anti-conceptual fear of any book, or man, that takes a firm stance on the world; anything that declares, through reason and logic, that there is *one* way to do things, *one* right code of ethics. The fact that you refuse to address this book with anything but hatred and bile, that you refuse to even *read* it, only serves to prove my point: you're terrified that you're wrong.
Okay, I wasn't going to, but: "not a dig on women" paired with "prance around like little girls"? Are you serious? Doesn't your cognitive dissonance get heavy after a while?
1. Gay men have eternally been relegated to the similar low-status of women. Look at the language from 'pussy' to 'nancy' (or yours above). Buying into and parroting this worldview doesn't get you out from under the shitheap, dude.
2. It's 2008: biological essentialism is inexcusable. Read some science (and no, evolutionary psychology is not science).
3. 'Butch' is not always an insult to women. Have you ever *met* a queer woman? Or would she sully your manhood just by being in the room?
Homophobia's bad enough when it's coming from straight people. Come on. Park your hate.
You have an anti-conceptual fear of any book, or man, that takes a firm stance on the world; anything that declares, through reason and logic, that there is *one* way to do things, *one* right code of ethics.
Or maybe many of us, not just Al, feel that "*one* way to do things, *one* right code of ethics" has never led to anything but Fascism, exclusion and active targeting of those who don't conform to the Fascist's view. Never. Not once in history.
It's a big world. There are a lot of right ways.
What I always have a hard time with here (in other words find highly amusing) is how we can take a topic that in the end is really about someones slight over how "unmanly" another man is, something that shouldn't be a real concern anyway when you think about it, and then in the ensuing debate start invoking "one code of ethics" and "one right way" mantras that raise the importance of this BS to something akin to the end of the world as we know it.
That, now that is what is fucking telling! That your petty concerns over looking "gay" are constructing what years ago would have been the premise for another crappy film starring Charlton Heston as a constipated bag of leaking testosterone. Oh right, sorry, that's masculine.
Keep at it there D.
And while we are at it, this whole "Al is celebrating the feminine and denying the masculine, blather on blather on". One question. Where? Where am I doing that?
My premise has not changed. If I meet you one on one, and you show me who you are, I will believe you. And yes, if a man shows me he is naturally effeminate, I will celebrate that, as it is him, it is who he is. i don't have a stake in other peoples perception of his worthiness to be their warped definition of male. Which usually is said to mean, "masculine". Let's try something beyond the word itself if we are going to attempt to define it!
Conversely, the same goes for the traditional masculine attributes that are not at their core misogynist. It is who someone is, why does it need your or my approval or admonishment? And about that very misogynist streak running through this thread, let's face it guys, there are some elements of traditional masculinity that are at their core, hugely woman hating. That cannot be denied. The fact that Jack says rather conveniently, "I take no view on the role of women in society" kind of makes the issue stand out.
Theriomorph:
It's "fascism" to believe that one code of ethics is better than another? So, then, logically, it's rather fascistic of you to be declaring that fascism is unethical. Once again, subjectivism boils down to insanity...
Alto:
If this was all really just about someone's preference for manly men over unmanly men, then why are you so hell-bent about smearing this book? It's not like it says, anywhere in it, that homosexuals who are effeminate should be murdered in the streets. The book expresses disapproval of men who embrace effeminacy -- a parody of true femininity -- over the masculinity that is their birthright by being born with a dick, with all the social, physiological, and psychological pressures attached. I see nothing wrong with such a message, but *you* apparently do, because you're spending inordinate amounts of time attacking masculine homos for, as I've quoted you before, "acting straight." Isn't it "homophobic" to claim that there's a way for straights to act, and a way for homos to act? How incredibly open-minded of you to require that all homos fit into the little pigeon hole you've set up for them, based on something as incidental as their sexuality. Really, being around you and your gay stormtroopers just gives me this warm-and-fuzzy feeling; y'know, 'cause of the open-mindedness, and all that...
D,
First, the reason I spend time on this topic D is because I have always been rather irritated by bullies. And I have found that calling them out, nine times out of ten, they eventually shut the fuck up and go home, dropping their ice cream in the sand on the way. I learned that early on and I have no issue with standing up for others if and when it is required.
But for Christs sake, a masculine affect is a masculine affect. We aren't reinventing the fucking wheel here. We all know it and many of us have it to the degree that an accusation of "gay" would not be levied at us based on cultural presumptions of what "gay" is. So then isn't "straight acting" buying into that whole concept? By saying you are acting straight, you are making the assumption and perpetuating the myth that to be gay and be an example of traditional masculine presentation is not a natural behavior.
But then we come back once again to the relative importance of it in a persons worth. Right, point concluded.
Congratulations on not making any sense. How is it "bullying" someone by saying that it's rather foolish to act like a woman when one is, in fact, a *man*? This isn't "bullying." To "bully" someone would be to tell them, "Do as I say, or else I'll beat the shit out of you [figuratively or literally]." (Consequently, the term you're really looking for is "fascism," once again proving that the only "argument" you and your ilk can use against your opponents is a shrill cry of "Nazi!" or "Fascist!" I'm suddenly remembering a certain "Monty Python" skit: "Witness the violence inherent in the system! He's oppressin' me, he's oppressin' me!" How apt...)
Rather than invoking irrational threats of violence or censorship (as the gay gestapo often has), "Androphilia" says, "Act like a man, or else I'm not going to take you seriously." So, now it's "bullying" to tell someone that you're going to ignore them for being a limp-wristed idiot? I assume you have at least a high school diploma; where'd you go to school, "William Clinton High"? "I guess that depends on what your definition of the word 'is,' is..."
"Okay, I wasn't going to, but: "not a dig on women" paired with "prance around like little girls"? Are you serious? Doesn't your cognitive dissonance get heavy after a while?"
I totally saw this coming. So, is it a good thing for a grown man to prance around like a little girl? Is this not an apt description of what goes on on floats at gay parades? It seems as though radical gays and feminists are so happy with their victimhood that they try to find any reason whatsoever to become offended. Even a common colloquialism.
If your definition of a homophobe is somebody who doesn't like weak, attention whoring, effeminite, whiners then I would happily wear that label.
High school? He and that therio woman both have their MFA or MAF or some artsy school masters. They are writers you know? ladi da
I've said it before, and I'll say it again and again.
Until they finally shut up and go away.
The Gay Gestapo wraps its Hate up in Rainbows.
And if I really had a desire to be "Straight Acting", I'd just go and have sex with women.