Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is an intriguing guy...[he] asks great questions and answers others with style, flair, reason and wit. On the blogroll he goes. Make him a part of your regular blogospheric reading. I certainly will.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Common Sense Junction: Misha @ Anti-Idiotarian never ceases to amaze me. He keeps finding other good blogs. I went over to A.I. this morning for my daily Misha fix and he had found this guy named Morgan Freeberg in Fair Oaks, California, that has a blog, House of Eratosthenes. Freeberg says its "The Blog That Nobody Reads" but it may now become the blog that everybody reads.
Jaded Haven: Good God, Morgan, you cover a topic from front to back with a screwy thoroughness I find mind boggling. I'm in awe of your thought proccesses, my friend, you're an exceptional talent. You start by throwing in the kitchen sink, tie in someone's syphilitic uncle, bend around a rip tide of brilliance and bring it all home in a neat, diamond dripping package of an exceptionally readable moment of damn fine wordsmithing. I love reading you.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
Philmon: When Morgan meanders, stick with him - he's got a point and it'll be worth it in the end. He's not a hit-and-run snarky quip kind of guy. The pieces all fall into place like tumblers in a lock and bang! He's opened a cognative door for you.
Rightlinx: Morgan at House of Eratosthenes is one of the best writers out there. I read him nearly every day because he manages to provide an interesting perspective, even though I don't always agree.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
Two good ones from Dr. Helen…first off, she’s continuing a discussion of sexual harrassment training upon which we were inspired to touch yesterday…oh so lightly…yes, we caressed it…teased it a little. Uh oh, now we have to go to training.
In her most recent installment, a professor who works for the state, has refused to go. He’s demanding the release of an official statement that his attendance in no way suggests or implies he is regarded with suspicion for such shenanigans.
I rather liked this comment from Bowen…
The easiest way to solve this problem is for men to start suing companies and organizations for the most insignificant comment or suggestive action. The problem with sexual harassment is not that men are assumed to be guilty. The problem is that men don’t sue enough. If men started suing en masse then these laws would either go away or be enforced in a different manner.
For example, if men started suing when women talked about their birthday parties or their periods, companies and courts would think twice about their policies. If men started suing when women went to work with their top button unbuttoned, companies and courts would think twice about their policies.
So again, the answer to this problem is not for men to fight these policies, but for men to embrace them whole-heartedly and turn them on women. Only then will women as a whole recognize that these policies are crap and ought to be revisited.
I often hear from leftist camps that the extent to which a society has become civilized, is measured in how it treats the least among those who live within it. I agree with that…if by “the least” you mean — the least organized. We do not need to worry about discriminating against ethnic minorities, or women, or poor people. We need to worry about discriminating against people who don’t organize to picket and litigate. This is where our true cowardliness is preserved, put on display, and chronicled with such unwavering regularity it becomes undeniable.
One set of rules for those who unionize, boycott, protest — and blog. A different set of rules for the others.
Helen’s earlier post points to a twenty-minute Pajamas TV interview between Roger L. Simon and filmmaker Lionel Chetwynd. The subject is Hollywood’s now somewhat-seasoned effort to reduce the differences between men and women, and to encourage women to become brittle bitches through the imagery they pump out.
I already know what the defense to this is…Hollywood’s in the business to make money, ergo, what Hollywood produces, is what the public demands. This is a case of the bullshit salesman coming to believe his own bullshit — it is by far the most common avenue, this failure to distinguish between “my bullshit has just the glimmer of truth about it” and “my bullshit is the gospel truth, therefore anyone who doubts even a speck of it is a moron.” Hollywood does sell what the public demands. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t throw in a few extra goodies on top. To say, whatever Hollywood pushes must be what the public demands, is to support the simplistic equation: Hollywood Product minus Public Demand equals Zero. That doesn’t hold up. Particularly in the area of providing the imagery of these repulsive, gelded men. I see, there, some things being provided by Hollywood that the public did not demand.
I can prove it. When women actually get hold of a man who’s been molded and shaped by this anti-male schtick…a flesh and blood man who’s a shell of his former self, a man who is a parody of himself…they are not pleased. They are not fulfilled. They are unhappy.
Swing on by Feministing if you doubt me. Read some posts. Read some comments. Do those chicks appear to be “happy,” to you?
No, the more accurate formula would be: Hollywood Product minus Public Demand equals Hollywood Agenda. And the first two items are not equal; the third, is decidedly non-zero. I would even say it is palpable. Toxic.
Anti-male conspiracy? I don’t believe in conspiracies; not active ones. Not the kind of conspiracies that call for meetings, and protocols, and secrets, and coordination. It’ll be very hard to convince me ever again that humans are up for any of that. But I do believe in the power of the passive conspiracy, which is most easily brought-about by the stigma. Once something is stigmatized, people will labor tirelessly toward avoiding it, and every step of the way they’ll be convinced they’re making their own individual decisions.
And you don’t have to watch too many movies nowadays, or inspect what you have seen for too long, to see that treating men on an equal footing with women, has been stigmatized.
The result is something the public certainly did not demand: Boring footage. When you know the man of the house is going to be just a big dummy, and his more-intelligent but long-suffering wife is going to be peevishly tolerating him and teaching her bitches-in-training to do the same…watching it unfold, becomes an exercise in suffering through the inevitable — watching something that’s supposed to turn out to be a surprise, fail at it.
Presto. Eighty-five minutes of “family comedy” become as monotonous as six or eight hours. But some “romantic comedies” are more like 140 minutes.
I think that’s why so many cell phones have games built-in nowadays.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.