By way of a friendly suggestion of a reading, I came across an article one could call controversial but a bit on the disgusting side as well. I’ve thought a lot about linking back to the article, only to reach the conclusion that if I do link back to it, or quote it, I would be granting a sexist supreme more exposure than he probably ever deserved. Therefore I will not link to or quote this individual.

What seems to be the point of the article, other than the author stressing that he is being a “man” by ignoring women’s emotions and cheating on his wife then allowing her some rough sex, is to affirm that women secretly crave tough cave men who could walk out on them any minute while publicly sustaining that they want the Hugh Grant sensitive type.

The only point I could agree with is that some movies sell the ultra-sensitive always-there-for-you man image that rarely if ever exists in straight men who are not declared hardcore submissive. I’ll give the author of the article that, and the rest of his alleged affirmations about “what women want” are baseless since, I hope, he’s a man. At least that’s what he likes us to believe.

This brings me to the use of words and the representation of his views. The style in which he expresses himself is as if he is stating undisputed facts, he seldom uses the words “I think” or any that demonstrate that he is expressing his own opinions and views. He rather says “women want this and that”, and “women don’t want this and that”. How do you know what women want? Is it because your wife lets you cheat on her and then make rough love to her and ask her “Who’s the boss” while you’re at it and force her to say YOU? (He said this in his article). Really, who are you to know what women want when what you have at home is a doormat, not a wife?

Calling a man of that type a “man’s man” is a horrible distortion of men’s images. Sincerely speaking, no man should approve of this lest all men be branded utterly sexist and inconsiderate. What is wrong with this person, I reckon, is that he thinks he’s God’s gift to women and that he knows what’s best for them, (walking out in the middle of a conversation, telling them to “shut up” when they’re talking, dominating them in bed, making them feel inferior, making them feel they cannot do without his presence in their lives- to name but a few examples from the article) while what he’s missing is the big picture. God would not send men as gifts to women; we would appreciate a gift certificate much, much better.

What’s most amusing, and I am using the term quite loosely here, about this person is that he affirms in two separate occasions that his wife is a strong and intelligent woman and that he loves her. It’s as if he’s dismissing any ideas we the readers may have of her as being “submissive, stupid and unloved”. Well I am sorry but that is a hard case to win. If a woman is smart enough to run her own life she should know her worth and not stay in a relationship that runs in “his” favour all the time, if she is capable of carrying herself as a modern woman she should not submit to the desires of a sadistic male who could not care less about being faithful or considerate, and if he loves her he would treat her like a human being and not like an object he owns.

At one point of his article this person admits that his wife is more successful than he is, and older than he is. I’m leaning towards the possibility that his dominance in the bedroom may relate to those two facts. Momma’s boy? Jealous of her success and sex is the way you assert your own self and your own success? You need professional help. Just don’t go around telling women what they want. You are clueless as to what women are. ( We do have souls, by the way).

I must admit I am infuriated by this person’s article (note the absence of the word “man”). It saddens me to think that in many relationships the man rules and the woman only obeys, and the man thinks it his birth right to run the show from A to Z and the woman just takes it as if this was true. What ever happened to a relationship being a mutual effort, a mutual passion, a mutual experience? What this person is trying to sell is the old fashioned outdated “I’m tha man” scenario that we have come to discover totally useless.

A word to the wise, Hugh Grant may play too sensitive roles but he’s in demand more than this bigot. Trust me on this one, and get me dinner, boy.

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!



This entry was posted on Friday, August 11th, 2006 at 10:06 pm and is filed under Opinion, Wonder Woman. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.