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...
Ten Types of Women You Need to Avoid
…and five others.
In the comments section, there seems to be a debate raging amongst the female population about whether the article is sexist. I would say this debate is representative of an eleventh type.
That was one of the things I learned early on about women to avoid — there are women out there, who don’t like men, and aren’t willing to admit that they don’t like men. The best way to pick up on this, is through TIK #58 which, I think is the basis of the complaint these females have when they say the article is “sexist.”
Just carry this attitude out to the logical extension if you’re thinking about dating this eleventh type. The article is “sexist,” because it says something negative about women. Okay. So the other article magically comes out, the one that says ten types of men are jerks. Anything wrong with that according to the eleventh type? Probably not. Refer again to TIK #58. So…you may say something bad against men, but not against women.
Now where does that lead? Well, obviously, she thinks she’s got certain birthrights and that she’s better than you. This is just a matter of consistency, and basic intellectual honesty. She belongs to a class which, it’s been declared already, is protected from criticism; you, dude, belong to another class, which is not. Is this the elegant Victorian brand of sex-discrimination, the Knights-and-Ladies variety, where women get special privileges because it’s acknowledged the men are stronger, and therefore actually good for something? Feh…don’t make me laugh. No, it’s the neo-feminist, ivory-tower-versus-primordial-muck brand of reverse discrimination. Thou shalt not say anything good about a man, nor anything negative about a woman.
The trouble with this is, it’s absolute. To comply with the rule a mere eleven months out of the year, or 23 hours in a day, simply won’t do. The other thing is, it’s self-delusional and contradictory. To discriminate, so long as it’s in the appropriate direction, is non-sexist. To call out a woman who irritates you, by doing the same thing an irritating man just did who you also called out, is sexist — even though your demonstrated non-favoritism is the very essence of neutrality. It’s the negativity. You can’t scatter it in the general direction of a woman, any woman.
Why is that a valid eleventh type? Well, think what life with a woman like that is like. The thoughts in your head are her business…which is fine, to a point, because she’s endeavoring to keep an anti-woman attitude from frothing up in the cauldron that is her mate. Very reasonable. The problem comes up when women do things that genuinely should piss you off and, before you comment about it, you have to check to see if your lady is out of earshot. What’s that say about womanhood? What’s that say about your day-to-day lifestyle? What’s that say about your feelings of togetherness and intimacy, as a couple? Nothing good.
What is life like throughout the day, anyway? You’re driving down the road and some dick cuts you off with a double lane-change, and you can’t kibitz about it until you pass him to make sure he really is a dick, so you can say something…because maybe it’s a stupid-ass bitch, and you aren’t allowed to notice what an incredibly stupid and dangerous thing she just did. TIK #58. Say something against one thing female, you say something against all things female. How about going the other way? What if you want to notice something good about another woman? Like she just changed her hairstyle or her perfume, and you want to give her a compliment about it in front of your better half? That’s suicide, of course. Tell you what, forget the compliment. You just want to mention something positive to your mate, about another woman. Like the other woman has nice-looking legs, or something. Heh. Just try it. So…you cannot notice anything good about women, you cannot notice anything bad about women. You are prohibited from acknowledging the existence of other women. You must live out your life, in the disguise of a straight man who is oblivious to the existence of women. It’s like the old Rodney Dangerfield joke about “when I met you I lost all interest in women.”
The joke is funny because it’s sad. And true. But a man whose wife says the list is “sexist,” has to be living that life. Things cannot go any other way.
I would say his list looks more like…
And all of these are offshoots of the one basic problem, of being generally unhappy with life and unsure of what to do with it. Basically, not being ready for a relationship. And we’re not discussing a certain percentage of women here, therefore, we’re not saying anything against women as a whole.
The one thing I’d say about women as a whole, and it’s of enormous benefit to an available fella to understand this, is: Women have a tendency to send out the “vibes” signalling their availability for a potential suitor, with a vigor inversely-proportional to their genuine availability. That is to say, the “healthy” ones have a tendency to hunker down, not give off the vibe, and bellyache about how the good men all seem to be taken. The ones who give off the vibe, are the ones who have issues.
Which is just another way of saying that the act of engaging in the hunt, is something best left to the gentlemen. When it was recognized as being our job, men and women got along much, much better. When it was recognized that women should “take the initiative” and start scoping the field for potential mates, and actively seek them out, the male-female relations were sent off to a low nadir. The women who did the looking, never had much confidence in what they were doing from beginning to end. The guys who got found, were never the cream of the crop.
It also lists just one more area, wherein a fella who finds his luck with the ladies isn’t panning out that well and is honestly curious as to why this is, and what he can do about it — he’s probably going to find out the answer is to stop being so lazy. That’s what I’ve learned in my lifetime. When I’ve not getten along with women, it’s a symptom of laziness. In housework, in communication, in “self-matchmaking” if you want to call it that…in something.
Some things are best left to women, other things aren’t. Men are wired to see what needs doing, and get it done. Thanks to technology, we live in a time where nothing actually needs doing. And thanks to feminism, we live in a time where people who actually expect good things to be done by a man, are thought to have the wrong idea — so men aren’t expected to do anything, except damage. It turns out that in modern times, avoiding the gargoyle of sloth, even by a man generally recognized as “hard-working,” is a proposition much more easily said than done.
Anyway, that’s more a rambling than a rant. Great list. And if it passes for what’s called “sexism,” we could certainly use a whole lot more of it.
Update 7/31/06: I left this off the original post because it didn’t seem relevant, but popular demand persists. Wilting beneath the relentless onslaught of the hot breath and screechy windbaggery of the pantsuit-termagant crowd…as, I suppose, all thinking beings ultimately must…the author of the above list provides a companion list of Ten Types of Men to Avoid.
I’m a straight man. I have no experience dating men, and cannot comment on the accuracy of this list. He seems to be a straight man too, so I’m unsure how he was able to generate it. The much larger issue, however, seems to be whether the list simply exists or not, so there it is.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.