May 16, 2018

"There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress..."

"... representing a new paradigm where no one identity group is overly centered. But in the Times 'twink' piece, it’s clear what the dangers involved are, too. Haramis writes of Sivan that there’s 'safety in his slimness,' and says his kind offers 'a new answer to the problem of what makes a man.' The implication is that skinniness comes with sensitivity, and maybe even—given the recent cultural accounting of male misbehavior—that it comes with a lower likelihood of being a creep. This is obviously nonsense: Small stature didn’t keep, say, Aziz Ansari from oafish behavior, according to his accuser. But the thinking echoes the way that physical appearance, when overemphasized, gets linked with moral virtue."

From "What 'The Age of the Twink' Actually Means/Are scrawny guys suddenly 'in'? Or are straight men just, finally, getting openly objectified like women and gay men long have been?" by Spencer Kornhaber (The Atlantic).

We talked about the Times "twink" piece yesterday, here.

124 comments:

John Lynch said...

Objectified by whom?

Henry said...

If a straight man falls over in the forest and no one is there to objectify him, does he give a goddamn?

buwaya said...

Physical beauty was always linked with moral virtue.
Or it has been in most pagan societies.
The Greeks for instance. Inherent in human nature - attractive people get a better reception.

It takes some considerable cultural reprogramming to shift that, and it never really takes.

Odds are there is a biological reason for this, that there are external indications of fitness, in a reproductive sense, and this may correlate to the quality of the mind in that body.

buwaya said...

As for the article, it is silly. This is a scientific question. Or rather, an engineering question, of reverse-engineering human nature.

There is plenty of data, it shouldn't be hard to extract a statistical model for mating success.

chickelit said...

Haven’t many of the most recent shooters been “toxic Twinks”?
Scrawny, not brawny.

Henry said...

But the thinking echoes the way that physical appearance, when overemphasized, gets linked with moral virtue.

Paging Ogden Nash. And Dorothy Parker. And Ecclesiastes.

Why do modern people write so many words about things discovered so long ago?

rhhardin said...

Eros depends on the inability to objectify.

Larry J said...

Women have objectified men (straight or otherwise) for a long, long time. Evidence includes groups like the Chippendale Dancers, movie stars, and firefighter calendars.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

I'm sorry, maybe I missed something... but what did that recent article on 'twinks' have to do with straight men?

Henry said...

Ogden Nash: It is always tempting to impute / Unlikely virtues to the cute.

Michael K said...

Another good reason for men to be bigger, even though it causes a riot to say so, is, if you play a bad round, your wife beats you up.

Golfers tend to be skinny, so maybe she thought it was OK.

Pump some iron, guys, and be safe.

Henry said...

I suspect that wife is just nuts.

n.n said...

Physical attraction is an indicator and incentive for duck dynasties. In the age of planned parenthood, selective (feminists' rites) and recycled-child, this is a controversy. As is the evolution of human life from conception. Transgender is politically congruent and profitable (i.e. social progress).

Freeman Hunt said...

Using "twink" to mean skinny is weird. That is not what it means!

Ignorance is Bliss said...

There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress

Have at it. Go ahead. Feel free.

Fandor said...

“Yon Cassius has a lean and hungry look.” from, you guessed it, JULIUS CAESAR.

Caldwell Titcomb IV said...

chickelit said...
Haven’t many of the most recent shooters been “toxic Twinks”?


Either that and/or gay, e.g. recently Orlando and Waffle House.

"There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress..."

Mr. Bill voice: "Oh No! Come see the objectification inherent in the social progress!"

Nonapod said...

Henry said...Why do modern people write so many words about things discovered so long ago?

Two possibilities: 1) they are unaware of the previous discoveries or 2) they dislike the previous discoveries and want to "reinterpret" them to their own liking. So either ignorance or cognitive dissonance.

Another common missunderstanding is that all human relationships must be interpreted as some sort of zero sum game, that because some group feels that they've been historically repressed it means that it's only fair that the modern incarnations of these repressors be punished in some way.

n.n said...

recent shooters been “toxic Twinks”

The abortionist in the Florida nightclub was likely a transgender/bisexual discriminated by the pretty transgender/homosexuals. The more recent case was extreme social bullying (and authorities that enabled its progress) and mental liberation (i.e. divergence), who were armed with double-edged scalpels (i.e. dual-use weapons).

Caldwell Titcomb IV said...

I almost forgot -

So you think “toxic Twinks” are funny, chickelit? I can't imagine what sort of mind thinks like that. Sad.

Toxic Twinky Defense.

My name goes here. said...

Does this mean judging women by the size of their bank account is also progress?

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

Iow, "Let's pretend that parading twinks is about 'social progress' or 'equality' or 'a new paradigm' or something all deep and brow-furrowy like that, instead of just gay designers, advertisers, executives, etc. getting their gay on and trying to foist it onto everybody else."

My husband, a man who likes nice clothes, has been rolling his eyes at the ever-increasing twinkalicious style of the clothing catalogues he's been receiving for many years. "It's like they're actively trying to repulse straight guys. Do they even want to sell clothes to me?"

tcrosse said...

Really, it's all about moving the shmattas.

Paul Zrimsek said...

A lot of words just to say "It's OK when we do it."

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

Freeman Hunt: Using "twink" to mean skinny is weird. That is not what it means!

Exactly. I'd say the mis-use is deliberate, though, not "weird".

tim in vermont said...

The social progress is in admitting it.

Plus, the bigger the government, the less you need a strong man willing to face down college tuition and a thirty year mortgage, so you may as well go with sexy, and hookups, right?

Jupiter said...

They are not subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with. They are according the same celebratory public objectification to homosexual men that attractive women have always enjoyed. It takes an especially perverse and determined kind of stupidity to think otherwise. It's just another flavor of the male gaze.

Khesanh 0802 said...

Is this the Darwinian aim of the feminists now: promote the evolution of weak and wimpy men and they will have won? The only problem will be when the barbarians appear at the gates and their women have not forced sufficient wimp evolution on them. Can you say "rape and pillage"? Oh no, you say, we are much too advanced for that - couldn't ever happen. One word: Bosnia.

tim in vermont said...

I just got dragged to "Something Rotten," the show was all female empowerment contra the patriarchy and gay themed dick jokes. Cultural arbiters are done with straight men. The nice thing is that women on the street, at least in my age bracket, roughly, aren't.

chuck said...

Right oh, straight men have never been objectified by women or gays. Give me a break, and please, my eyes are up here.

tim in vermont said...

Men are objectified in different ways, sure you can be overweight by a lot, but you better have a London tailor.

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

Jupiter: They are not subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with. They are according the same celebratory public objectification to homosexual men that attractive women have always enjoyed. It takes an especially perverse and determined kind of stupidity to think otherwise.It's just another flavor of the male gaze.

Bingo. I'm surprised at the number of people buying the phoney-baloney premises of the articles.

tim in vermont said...

Fighting natural selection is like fighting entropy, your victories are guaranteed to be short-lived.

Freeman Hunt said...

Exactly. I'd say the mis-use is deliberate, though, not "weird".

Imagine a supposedly serious article using the word "bimbo" to mean thin and then saying that we were entering The Age of the Bimbo.

Twink implies not only thinness but weakness, youth, acting cutesy, dimness, and being considered disposable by sexual partners. It is not a nice word, and it's a word I've only heard used by gay men to refer to certain other gay men.

Freeman Hunt said...

Is this cultural appropriation?

Chris N said...

A lot can be cleared up when you watch a video of any editorial staff, really, on YouTube, or see them live and talk with them.

Khesanh 0802 said...

Pajama Boy comes to mind. The new ideal!

Henry said...

The labor theory of value is the deadliest objectification of men so far. I don't think any fashion editor can beat that.

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

Freeman: Is this cultural appropriation?

No, it's cultural infiltration.

Michael said...

Who talks like this, thinks about this, cares about this? There is a great struggle for relevance in the gay arena and it will continue because movement wise it is irrelevant and boring and stupid.

As if straight men have not been "objectified" and "vilified" lo these last decades.

tim in vermont said...

Ok, read the article, it's all male gaze among gay men. No surprise. The problem with aspiring to twinkdom, by, I guess, living on grapefruit, like a friend of mine who used to be a jockey did, is that it's time limited, like ingenue.

tim in vermont said...

If it were driven by women, it would be tall, thin, ectomorphs like Jame Taylor.

Roy Jacobsen said...

This writer seriously believes that straight males are not objectified, that we have not always been objectified?

Hope he doesn't consider himself "woke," 'cuz he ain't awake.

langford peel said...

Who cares about this faggy nonsense?

Fag hags?

And Trumpit.

Bay Area Guy said...

Chicks have been objectifying me my entire life. I think it's the rugged charm coupled with the long schlong.

I could be wrong, though.

In contrast, though, have you seen the working/professional women commuting on BART to and from San Francisco these days? I'd say 95% are neither objectifyable, nor fuckable.

So maybe that's progress?

I pledge to never objectify ugly women. And if you're a hot gal, but a militant Leftist, I will probably avoid you too.

buwaya said...

On BART in the mornings there are maybe three good looking women per car on average. Probably more if crowded, but you can't see them of course.

So sue me, I am a man and I look.

deepelemblues said...

Only an idiot progressive who doesn't know jack shit about what happened week before last - other than Obama was president back there somewhere, in the misty days of yore - would think straight men have never been "objectified."

Straight men have been physically objectified from day one.

chickelit said...

There’s an argument to be made that subjecting white men to the same racism and sexism everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress...

Sound related?

Dude1394 said...

Our youngsters are in dire need of an "actual" threat to them. They are becoming worse that soft.

n.n said...

good looking women... So sue me, I am a man and I look

Look, but do not gawk, and don't touch. The ducks remain viable, and civilization is conserved.

The Cracker Emcee Rampant said...

"Chicks have been objectifying me my entire life."

You wish but exactly. Straight men want to be objectified. Because unlike feminists, gays, and POC's, we have the agency to say, "Thanks, but no".

Ignorance is Bliss said...

The Cracker Emcee Rampant said...

...we have the agency to say, "Thanks, but no".

The agency? Yes. The inclination? No.

Bay Area Guy said...

@Buwaya,

"On BART in the mornings there are maybe three good looking women per car on average. Probably more if crowded, but you can't see them of course."

3 good looking women per car? I don't believe it! Way too high a batting average. How many women are on these cars, like 5,000?

You must have the "hot" cars. Most of the women on the early morning commute look like the exhausted female version of Ernest Borgnine.

n.n said...

The eunuchs were created through transgender conversion therapy. In liberal societies, the male sex has been subjected to a similar therapy that emphasizes feminine gendered traits. Presumably because they resisted the resumption of institutional diversity, witch/warlock hunts, witch/warlock trials, and abortion rites.

women commuting on BART... I'd say 95% are neither objectifyable, nor fuckable. So maybe that's progress?

Yes, from 0% (very few) to 95%, it's an [unqualified] progressive process or monotonic change.

Bay Area Guy said...

I don't know that I've been objectified by any Gay Americans. Once I start talking politics or wear a red MAGA hat, they usually scatter.

Why is that?

exhelodrvr1 said...

Wiry, not skinny. I'm tired of having to tell people that!

buwaya said...

I come from the South, you come from the East.
Most of my lot are from SF proper or Daly City.
There may be a difference in populations.

Unknown said...

Objectify the hetero boys all you want, they will either be complimented or won't care, if they notice at all.

-sw

Luke Lea said...

"subjecting straight men to the same objectification as everyone else..."

As if Hollywood (and Madison Ave.) hadn't been doing that since the days of Rudolph Valentino. How silly can you get? The bar is on the floor.

traditionalguy said...

Hormones uber alles. Testosterone adds muscle strength and a higher capacity for useful hostility. This entire bruhaha is a campaign to replace the social approval of men with Testosterone with an approval of safe eunuchs who threaten no one...and then how about those guns that look like they are on testosterone. The ones with the 30 round clips that fire bursts at other hostile forces such as MS-13 guerilla bands with machetes.

Forbes said...

Yeah, the bar is on the floor, for sure.

Twinks? That's the gay objectification of teen males (or the skinny teen look). Anyone, outside of the NYT, that's been half-awake knows that trivia.

becauseIdbefired said...

There is an argument to be made, true, but, . . .

Pick up a magazine targeting men, and the ads very often have images of attractive women.

Pick up a magazine targeting women, and the ads very often have images of attractive women.

It's a stretch, but I suspect people as a whole find the female form (far) more persuasive than the male form.

Henry said...

The objectified man: Giant slayer, harp player, lover of women.

madAsHell said...

There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same unwanted sexual overtures everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress...

Now define social progress!

Bay Area Guy said...

There was term in the 1960's and 1970s -- "Chickenhawk" -- which meant adult men looking for teenage boys, mostly homeless, street-wise kids to do various dirty deeds. Read "Times Square" by Bill Sherman.

It's a good book, depicting an ugly, unpleasant underworld.

Of course, the term was altered by Democrats in the 2000s to mean "Republican who never served in the military, but supports the Iraq War."

But I digress.

The author of this silly article might be a old-fashioned "Chickenhawk."

John Scott said...

Ok, now I am embarrassed for calling myself an ex twink yesterday. I never heard of the term. And not having read the article I was just going by the picture. I looked just like those guys at that age. Though, I definitely fell in the wiry catagory. For what it's worth, I never had a problem getting a date. Girls/women never had a problem with my thinness. At least they never let on that they did.

stlcdr said...

Objectifying [straight] men in the same way, blah, blah. I don’t think most men will give a damn. And that’s probably the problem. The escalation will continue because these people who are trying to engineer society find it can’t, actually, be engineered.

Gunbunny62 said...

Twinkle Twinkle little star'
I have no idea how gay you are.
If your the ideal of modern man'
Then you've proven evolution is but a sham.

Yancey Ward said...

I found the article on twinks hilarious, yesterday. Who do twinks as a whole appeal to? Gay men and female pedophiles, and pretty much no one else. About the only physical trait they have that some straight males have tried to emulate is the hairlessness- that does seem to have some appeal to some females, but it isn't a broad appeal as far as I have ever been able to determine.

If the twink craze in fashion is an objectification of straight men, it is badly missing the target.

Teller said...

Pretty much the difference between Axe and Mennen.

traditionalguy said...

The Social Progress Express is loading now, and it is about ready to move on down the line transporting thousands of boxcars loaded with rounded up deplorable White Males to FEMA Camps ready for a final solution. All they await is a 5th Supreme Court Justice willing to re-write the Second Amendment and stop all that "Obstruction of Justice."

Bay Area Guy said...

All this leftwing social engineering -- particularly the gender-bending -- can get quite annoying.

On the one hand, I'm too old (early 50s) for it to affect me. On the other hand, I do have young adult kids and do care about their future, and the future of our country.

So, what to do?

1. Generally resist the pussification of the American male.
2. Generally support and encourage young women to look good, treat men nice, and strive for a healthy balance between work life and love life.
3. Generally accept gays and lesbians and help integrate them into mainstream culture and society.
4. However, resist and relentlessly mock gay and lesbian ACTIVISTS who want much more than to peacefully co-exist, but, in fact, want to change, shape, and control the culture to suit their particular weird designs.

Something like that.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
traditionalguy said...

By the way, those Twink pics are precisely what all men look like after 6 months time of starving weakens them until their disease resistance is gone. Intentional Starvation is the oldest war tactic used by Marxists who want to engineer progress by a Genocide.

Bay Area Guy said...

Here's a handy list of male archetypes to be relentlessly mocked:

1. Beta Males
2. Chicken Hawks
3. Pajama Boys
4. Snowflakes
5. InCells
6. Vegetarians; and
7. Peace activists

The list is not exhaustive. So, Expressio unius est exclusio alterius does not apply. Any members of the aforementioned groups seeking to elevate from said low status will be highly encouraged and praised.

rhhardin said...

Scything pass over the back yard completed, muscles grown
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rhhardin/27282424397/sizes/o

Hayfield motif.

rhhardin said...

Antenna used this morning to talk to PA, OK, NY, IL and CA. Another guy activity.

SDaly said...

"The argument to be made" only works if you treat people as nothing more than a representative for a group, rather an as an individual.

(Also true that the entire article was just a way to get that "twink" picture in paper as gay clickbait).

langford peel said...

."Generally accept gays and lesbians and help integrate them into mainstream culture and society."

Historically the acceptance of gays and lesbians into culture and society destroys that culture and society. From Roman times to Victorian England to Weimar Germany the intergration of homosexual perversion into society is a sick and destructive process.

It is one of if not the major indication that your society is sick and in decline and ready to die.

langford peel said...

Those that forget history are doomed to repeat it.

SDaly said...

"But we're different, better and more enlightened!"

Bay Area Guy said...

@langford peel,

I hear ya. Maybe, I'm biased because I do live in the Bay Area, and have gay neighbors/friends/work colleagues/family members.

I do make it a point to treat people as individuals, not part of groups.

Hey I still voted against gay marriage in California -- and we won! Except for all those darn federal courts who overturned it.

C'est la vie, c'est la guerre.

becauseIdbefired said...

The last Castrato (eunuch) recording, singing to Bach's prelude #1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQo2PNnwOww

Jay Elink said...

madAsHell said...
There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same unwanted sexual overtures everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress...

************************************************

Unless the actual subject has come up, how does the person making the overture to a person he/she's attracted to know it's unwanted in advance of making it?

How does anyone who seeks a sexual overture from someone else convey that message, w/o making a subtle sexual overture of their own?

Maybe people should wear those badge-and-lanyard thingies around their necks, one side of the badge reading "Sexual overtures unwanted", and the other saying "wanted".

Would that be social progress?

becauseIdbefired said...

Generally, the name of the game is different, at least in my experience.

Females have a drive to attract as many mates as possible, being selective in the mates they choose because of pregnancy (sorry, the pill isn't going to wipe out that millions of year old instinct).

Males have a drive to have as much sex with as many mates as possible.

That's a general rule. Your mileage will vary, but here are the statistics.

"For the entire sample group, it was determined that women averaged 7 sexual partners while men averaged 6.4."

one study in San Francisco found that nearly 50% of gay men had more than 500 partners

And, somewhat interestingly:

Lesbians who had a long-term partner reported having fewer outside partners than heterosexual women.

Get women out of the way, and number of sexual partners skyrockets (see how frustrated our young men are).

Get men out of the way, and number of sexual partners declines, in at least one circumstance.

Women discriminate. In this way of thinking, women guide evolution very strongly.

Women made us men exactly what we are. It's quite ironic to see modern age feminists complain so much about what their sisters wrought.

EDH said...

"There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress..."

The person who said that obviously never spent a day in "family court" where straight men are routinely treated to true objectification at the hand of the state -- not this trendy perceptual self-image crap.

SDaly said...

Jay Elink -

Here's a proposed solution. Men should be proactive in righting the wrongs of the past. With every woman they meet, they should open the conversation with "any sexual overtures from you would be welcome/unwelcome." Then, the women who got the "unwelcome" message could initiate a sexual overture so that these men could experience unwelcome sexual overtures just like everyone else supposedly does.

Also, I don't understand the assumption that straight men would historically have had lower rates of unwelcome sexual overtures than gay men. I would posit that gay men have far lower rates of unwelcome sexual overtures.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

Men were objectified as Good Providers for centuries. Were other qualities also valued? Certainly, but other qualities besides beauty have been valued in women as well. Maybe it is progress that this is less true now, but it is simply ludicrous to pretend that objectification of men is something new.

Bay Area Guy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bay Area Guy said...

I, for one, do not mind being objectified nor the target of unwelcome sexual overtures, as long as said overtures are made by a hot babe of female persuasion.

I think this is a reasonable compromise.

LakeLevel said...

This is what happens when unhinged progressives drift too far from the real world. Almost everything they say and do is completely made up bullshit and can safely be ignored. That is unless the people stupidly give them political power, then watch out, you'll soon be forced to wear your underwear on the outside of your pants.

Jay Elink said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jay Elink said...

Blogger Jay Elink said...
I said, above:

Maybe people should wear those badge-and-lanyard thingies around their necks, one side of the badge reading "Sexual overtures unwanted", and the other saying "wanted".
****************

I got to thinking about a party full of young people, all wearing their thingies, and how the entire room would be rustling with the sounds of the "wanted" and "unwanted" sides being turned over and displayed depending on who they were talking to.

If would make for a boffo box-office RomCom. I should pitch it to Harvey W.

tim in vermont said...

Hemingway talked about carrying a knife on account of the advances of gay men when he was a twink in on the road and alone 8n the Old Northwest. But that's probably a lie.

madAsHell said...

as long as said overtures are made by a hot babe of female persuasion.

I used to have that problem, but now it's just men, and I don't swing that way.

tim in vermont said...

What's going on with the Dow? Almost 25K again, how long can they ignore Krugman?

Sebastian said...

"There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress... representing a new paradigm where no one identity group is overly centered."

As BAG implied, it just depends on who is doing the objectifying.

Forget twinks. If this plays out the right way, "the same objectification" may indeed contribute to "social progress."

bagoh20 said...

Does this mean that women will now be buying me drinks, movies, and meals, and if I play it right, vacations, cars, and a house just to get their hands on my objectified body?

Yea, I doubt it too. They don't really mean it, becuase they don't feel it. They don't have what it takes to really objectify with commitment, to feed the beast, to take the risks, to live with passion. Too bad.

Lewis Wetzel said...

There’s an argument to be made that subjecting straight men to the same objectification everyone else has long lived with is not only fair play, but in fact social progress, representing a new paradigm where no one identity group is overly centered.
What isn't outright wrong in this sentence is gibberish.
Straight men are indeed objectified, and always have been. Modern feminists and leftists in general are the first to objectify straight men. The simple act of making the defining characteristic of a group of people "straight men" objectifies them.

President Pee-Pee Tape said...

Most men of reproductive age wouldn't mind being sexually objectified at all. It would give them more of what they want anyway, and provide them a break from being understandably judged based on their greater likelihood/ability to contribute to humanity's economic and social development.

Josephbleau said...

Blogger Teller said...
Pretty much the difference between Axe and Mennen.

I don't have to Axe about being Mennen.

FIDO said...

So there are two flavors of vegans: the sticks and the radishes. Hyper skinner or round as a ball.

I know a couple. SHE is a vegan. He is spineless, so he eats vegan too. She is a ball and he is a stick. Heck, a twink looks burly compared to him. No protein.

I visit. I am a carnivore and a lifter. If I looked at girls the way she looked at me, I'd be up on charges or banned from a mall.

Even woke Vegan bitches can't help their programming. I wish them all the pain their cognitive dissonance and in satisfying sex lives gives them.

FIDO said...

Unsatisfying. Damned autocorrect.

Mm. Actually I've been visually raped by women a couple other times.

Usually woke women who, when drunk, let their programming out.

In vino veritas

rcocean said...

I get ogled all at time when I put on my shorts and women get a gander at my strong, manly - yet lovely - legs.

Its why I usually keep them covered.

rcocean said...

Pajama Boy said he was a chick magnet - and we didn't believe him.

Sads.

Unknown said...

Men are not objectified? Really? On dating sites women think 80% of men are below average.
During more primitive times, men did take into account if their prospective wife could handle the hard work of a farm. The women today would equally take offense at that I think.

wildswan said...

This generation will rediscover sex with the other sex at twenty in catacombs hiding from the Community Helpers (Gender Division).

n.n said...

Babies (i.e. "fetus" or offspring) have been objectified since the progressive and liberals sects of the Pro-Choice Church resumed abortion rites after receiving instruction from the twilight fringe. Denial of lives deemed unworthy.

Men and women, boys and girls, have been objectified since the establishment of institutional diversity or color judgments. Denial of individual dignity and character.

Individuals in relationships that are not "=" or politically congruent have been selectively excluded with social progress.

chickelit said...

The tyranny of “normalcy” unfairly burdens LGBLT couples and fewsomes when it comes to procreation. It’s only fair that straight men be punished for their long standing favored position.

John Public said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Temujin said...

That is one fucked up generation.

TexasDude said...

Just google twink and tell me again it represents skinny straight guys.

Sacto_Dave said...

When I think of slight, slender hetero men I envision a hardcore smoker, tweaker-type; always nervous, keyed up, maybe a little on the manic depressive spectrum. Sweaty and sour smelling because of the high energy restlessness from inner demons and drugs, cigarettes. I've known some of these guys in my younger days and there's really nothing appealing about them except maybe their high energy sometimes leads to flights of wild imagination. Sometimes paranoia.

Michael K said...

Earth to chuck.

DOJ/FBI (and its leakers) have shredded what little credibility they have in claiming they cannot comply with subpoena. They are willing to provide details to friendly media, but not Congress? Willing to risk very source they claim to need to protect?

You'll feel better soon. Once all that poison is out of your system.

Bob Loblaw said...

DOJ/FBI (and its leakers) have shredded what little credibility they have in claiming they cannot comply with subpoena.

I don't understand how they can do that. If the president orders them to comply with a subpoena, are they not required to do so? I mean, for whom do these people work if not the president and not Congress?

Congress should zero out their funding until all the requested documents are received. I worked for the government for a few years - nothing concentrates the mind of a government bureaucrat like a cut to his budget.

Syem Park said...

Semoga artikel ini bermanfaat untuk anda

CHLOROFORM DI PAPUA
CHLOROPHYLL DI PAPUA
LIQUID DI PAPUA
TRIVAM DI PAPUA
SLEEPING BEAUTY DI PAPUA 
CHLOROFORM DI JAKARTA
CHLOROPHYLL DI JAKARTA
LIQUID DI JAKARTA
TRIVAM DI JAKARTA
SLEELPING BEAUTY DI JAKARTA

exhelodrvr1 said...

"On dating sites women think 80% of men are below average."

That's because some of us are so far above average that it skews the results. For that, I apologize on our behalf.

tim maguire said...

There are those who see rich and poor in the world and want to raise the poor up.

There are those who see rich and poor in the world and want to drag the rich down.

MadisonMan said...

Men are objectified in different ways, sure you can be overweight by a lot, but you better have a London tailor.

..and a Bank Account in Geneva.

Bill R said...

I was a scrawny pimply faced teenager and not much better in my early twenties. Somehow, in my late twenties and early thirties, I became strikingly handsome. Back then, I was objectified all the time. It was great.

FIDO said...

Well, an objectified man is able to, at the end, make his displeasure known in a visceral way. Women have less upper body strength. And a woman can't rape an unwilling man without a lot of drugs involved. The reverse is not true

tim in vermont said...


"That's t's because some of us are so far above average that it skews the results"

Of course women are pretty much all the same. I know you are kidding, still, there are female curve wreckers and men still grade fairly, usually.

tim in vermont said...

I still like strong thighs on a woman, providing she's somewhere around normal weight, maybe it's leftover from wanting a woman who can deal with cattle and horses.

hombre said...

What if straight men with muscles responded to being objectified with the same vigor and vitriol as do the LGBT mafia and modern feminists?

Now that would be something to behold!