Nationally-Syndicated Radio Host Laura Ingraham: Brett Favre Is a Wimp
March 17th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
"All these years, and I didn’t know there was a woman quarterback in the NFL,” said Ingraham to start her Friday show that aired on replay on Monday at 2:00 a.m. on Newsradio 620 WTMJ.
“Brett Favre…we’re watching this in the studio, obviously retiring from the NFL, great quarterback, handsome 38-year-old man, he gets up there and he does this press conference that was frankly one of the most embarrassing things I have ever seen.
“That’s a great message for young boys. ‘Get up there and act like a girl and start blubbering like a baby.”
To watch Favre's retirement announcement, click here or see below.
Ingraham's comments are very unfair, and she owes Favre an apology. I recall that some people--including Los Angeles radio hosts Mark and Brian of KLOS--mocked John Elway for crying when he announced his retirement, too, which was also unfair.
I'm not a big football fan, in part because I don't like the way many football players get beat up so badly during their careers that they are semi-crippled by the time they're 50. I'm appalled that former NFL running back Earl Campbell--a star during my youth--can barely walk.
I think the NFL needs to take strong measures to change the situation. If football players had a strong union like the baseball players do, something might have already been done about it (though the MLBPA's mishandling of the steroids issue doesn't give one much optimism).
I still remember watching, as a kid, Darryl Stingley become paralyzed, and while football is a worthy game, I've always had something of an aversion to the macho "hit the hardest hit/crush 'em" football culture.
Thanks to feminist bloggers Barry Deutsch (aka "Ampersand") and, by extension, Jill Filipovic for the story. Barry's blog post is here, Jill's is here.
"));
19 queries. 0.578 seconds.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Only women are allowed to cry. Men have to hide their love away. "BE A MAN"
He is/was one of my favorites to watch. A class act. He spent many years (in physical pain...with no tears) on the football field and took it for the team. It just goes to show how emotional pain is harder to keep inside.
A perfect example of gender bias.
It took great (GREAT) courage for him to hang it up now. Now it's her turn to retire.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I have been reading similar comments on sports websites, and the consensus is the same; the people mocking Brett are despicable. Favre is a great player who just went through one of the greatest careers in the history of the league, and is someone who had a lot of ups and downs during it. To expect a person not to get emotional during that is rather horrible. Weren't fellas supposed to get in touch with their feelings? I know if I were Brett I would be doing the same thing.
As a Giants fan I was both proud and sad to see my team play against this legend for the last time. This hypocrisy about when it is and is not okay for a man to show emotions has me feeling dizzy.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Deriding a man who is emotional at the end of his long and storied career is childish. There is little more to say on the subject. Consider the source and move on.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
“That’s a great message for young boys. ‘Get up there and act like a girl and start blubbering like a baby.”
That's so horrible. She and other such radio commentators are the ones giving a 'great message' - "if you express any emotion, you will get mocked nationally".
Warren Farrell:
What if we sent little girls out on the football field at nine years of age, and told them that they were going to take this little piece of pigskin, and they were going to get concussions, spinal cord injuries, broken noses, kneecap injuries that will last for life, and that if they get the pigskin a hundred yards down the field the boys will love them more?
March 17th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Oh my god! He defied the inhuman stereotype! How dare he?
Like Glenn I am also no fan of football or its fans. Players however, really deserve a commendation for the things they go through on the field. This is not the feminists this time criticizing a man's behavior its the chivalrists - as if there is a difference between those two breeds of entitlement beings.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
As an addendum, I find it amazing to insult a Brett's manliness and integrity when the man never missed a game in 17 straight years of play, a feat comparible (or even greater) than Cal Ripken's record in baseball.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
We (my family) are Bills fans, however Brett Favre is our favorite quarterback and player. It took guts to do what he did. Do you think that he did not know that he would break down? Of course he did! He did this interview knowing this, that is a man's man. We must be "sensitive" because women want us that way but when we are we are publicly humiliated . . . we cannot win . . . for shame Laura ingraham . . . for shame . . . after all it is not as if he is running for President (yes that was a shot)
b
March 17th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Nobody cares what Ingraham says--she is just a female version of limbaugh. So what. She marginalized herself years ago.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
They definitely should not let boys play football, until they are 18, i.e. they shouldn't allow it in schools. I seriously doubt a young boy's body can take that kind of punishment in the long run.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
I recall watching some cable news talking head mock Favre's crying. I want to say it was on Fox News or MSNBC, but I cannot be sure. It is rather surprising though that a quite a few people were put off by Favre showing emotion. This is a game and a job he loved and he probably did not want to retire. It is completely normal for a man who has devoted so much of himself to something for long to cry. It would have been odder if he had not responded emotionally at all. To be honest, that is supposed to be one of the socially accepted points where men can cry. Calling Favre a girl or a baby is just idiotic when one considers how long he played football without bursting into tears every time he got hit.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
What she's saying is that men need to learn to express their emotions in good, respectable ways, like shooting up worplaces and post offieces.
I'm not kidding, either. Guys on death row are swamped with marriage proposals. Ladies love outlaws and all that. This is a tawdry culture with tawdry women, so what did we expect, really? If you want class, you have to go to Europe or import their women, which you can't do thanks to Senator Maria Cant-do-Well.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
American football is a tough sport. I would expect more out of Brett Favre. If that were a rugby player I would be seriuosly embarrassed.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Is she getting desperate for ratings? Is she the Madonna of talk radio & trying to insult people and institutions for attention?
March 17th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
A comment from Padagon.
Farve is insulted for showing emotion and someone still manages to twist it into a "women are the true victims" argument. Nevermind the fact that Ingraham just did exactly women get up in arms about. Oh no this is about someone saying that Ingraham is not a real woman...
March 17th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Yeah, she's a retard, and any press is good press for her. Hey every one, look at Laura the retard...
Regarding Bret, with emotions like that, it's easy to see how he was motivated to greatness!
March 17th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Jake Squid
March 17, 2008 at 12:08 pm
A better message for young boys would, undoubtedly, be, “You wanna cry? I’ll give you something to cry about!” Followed immediately by beating with a stick.
Oh My God.
PS Limey, what are you talking about?
March 17th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
(from Pandagon)
March 17th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Stop! I think I missed the point of that quote! Didn't I? I hope so.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
PS Limey, what are you talking about?
Limey is talking about how, in the UK, male gender stereotypes are more strictly enforced.
*Grins Devilishly*
March 17th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Damn right that the feminist and men's rights advocates ought to be on the same page on this one. This is ground zero for one of the main issues you all talk about -- gender stereotyping that purports to tell people (and it doesn't matter what gender they are) that they ought to act, or not act, a certain way solely because of their gender. It's the sort of thinking the feminists have been fighting for a long time, and, gee, guess what? It affects men, too.
I look forward to the day when there can be one Web site that isn't a special interest lobby for a particular gender -- but battles unhealthy gender stereotyping.
Give Glenn Sacks some credit, feminist sites-- he pays a high price among certain of his readers when he blasts unfair stereotyping that affects only women. The femininst sites aren't as quick to share the love with the men, unless the stereotyping also happens to affect women. Must be a decent living in preaching to the choir without worrying about half the population. Imagine if you'd expand your audience a little to reach some guys who are sympathetic to your gender stereoytping message (e.g., me) but figure the only stereotyping you care about is the kind that hurts women. You know, intellectual honesty and all that stuff.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
I used to think that, when a woman put a man down by saying he was acting like a girl, that was indicative of some king of inferiority complex among women - they used femininity as an insult because they felt it was somehow bad and less worthy than masculinity. I've come to realise that, because of the standard position of female privilege and male deference, she isn't saying he's acting like an inferior - she saying he's presuming to act like his betters, something he has no right to do. He's being uppity.
I also used to believe women were sincere when they said they wanted men to show their feelings. Now I think there are two possible meanings to that. The best one is she wants you to show your feelings ABOUT HER: i.e. tell her you love her more often. The second, and more common in my experience, is she wants to be able to manipulate you, and to know the best place to stick the knife, without the bother of having to work it out herself. Female emotional abuse and neglect of men is not only acceptable but endemic, and we need to highlight that, and say we're not taking it anymore.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
GS wrote:
"I'm not a big football fan, in part because I don't like the way many football players get beat up so badly during their careers that they are semi-crippled by the time they're 50. I'm appalled that former NFL running back Earl Campbell--a star during my youth--can barely walk."
For the record, Earl Campbell has said many times he does not attribute his debilitations all to football.
As a former football player who had to drop off a spot on a Division II team, when he and his girlfriend became pregnant – I would gladly live crippled and in pain for my last years of life if I could play college and pro football.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
This Swimmer Is in Deep End Of Gender Wars
"Kenyon Smith, a lithe and good-looking young man who just had his 18th birthday, is an Aquamaid."
"He's a phenomenon. His twists and splits and head-down pirouettes are crisp and fast. His rocket thrusts him out of the water, pointy-toes first, all the way up to his armpits. He can swim almost 75 yards underwater without blacking out."
"There are only two things this Aquamaid can't do: Go to a U.S. college on a sports scholarship. And go for gold at the Olympics."
"All because he's a he. Women have broken into everything from wrestling to rodeo, but in synchronized swimming, the deep end is strictly roped off to men. Colleges striving for sexual parity, as civil-rights law requires, won't let men waltz-crawl with women. At the Olympic Summer Games, only boxing and baseball still exclude women; only softball, rhythmic gymnastics and synchro still exclude men."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120571966898740709.html?mod=hpp_us_inside_today
March 17th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
I think Laura Ingraham was off the mark in this case. She normally has a good message.
I expect her to apologize in the next couple of days for this.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
There is a reason why Ingrahams fiance dumped her. No man could listen to that screeching shrew for very long. It's painful just to hear it on the radio.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Emotions are a powerful part of any human, and those men who have them are often far more effective than those who don't. Having emotions which can be touched by profound events in one's life, does not an emotion-driven person make.
And some types of emotions can provide enormous motivation, and effectively turbocharge the capabilities of already highly capable men.
To that end, I wouldn't suggest f-cking with a Marine who is not afraid to shed tears over a lost comrade.
And I wouldn't suggest f-ucking with a father who is not afraid to shed tears over a child lost to a corrupt family court system.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I used to think that, when a woman put a man down by saying he was acting like a girl, that was indicative of some king of inferiority complex among women....she saying he's presuming to act like his betters, something he has no right to do.
I don't think it's either. What I think, is that it has to do with women's freedom vs. men's restrictions. Women are free to take whatever path they want, feminine or masculine, while men are only allowed to be masculine. It's her saying "know your restrictions!"
March 17th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Demonspawn - "What I think, is that it has to do with women's freedom vs. men's restrictions. Women are free to take whatever path they want, feminine or masculine, while men are only allowed to be masculine. It's her saying "know your restrictions!""
I think you just nailed, dude.
March 17th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Oops!
My bad,
That would be "nailed it"
March 17th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
This sort of thinking, sadly, is all too common among American women. Men are expected to act a certain way -- like real men, and if we don't, women make it very clear they don't want us. And this is not "the patriarchy" speaking -- this is women, and it goes back to cave-person times. Men have their roles and we'd better not deviate from them.
So all you feminists who expect men to be "liberated," and not to have "fragile male egos," just understand THIS is what we must contend with -- women like Laura. Women generally don't want to see a man cry. They think it's very peculiar and they don't like it. Women expect men to be stereotypical men. That's not US telling us to be like that -- that's women. I think it stinks -- all of it. I'd bet you most men agree. But feminists, we generally take our cues from how women perceive us -- because of that fundamental mating instinct. So if you really want us to be "liberated" beings, you need to work on the way your sisters think about us.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Tim Murray, that's a great post.
I think that when Ingraham says Favre shouldn't "act like a girl", it's a restriction rather than saying "don't lower yourself" -- exactly as Demonspawn says.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
"Jake Squid
March 17, 2008 at 12:08 pm
A better message for young boys would, undoubtedly, be, “You wanna cry? I’ll give you something to cry about!” Followed immediately by beating with a stick."
I would REALLY like to know what was really meant here, because right now, that's fixing to be the most appaling thing I've ever seen typed.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Laura Ingraham is a moron. Someone who was as passionate about their job as Brett was about playing football should be choked-up when announcing his retirement. In fact, if Brett was able to be cold and emotionless while retiring, it would have diminished him in my eyes.
Yeah, it’s uncomfortable when men cry, I have that stereotype in me; but there is also something meaningful in it. Because of its rarity, it means something: much like swearing, if you swear all the time it means nothing, but if you don’t, and you let a f*ck, s*it, c*nt, etc fly, then people take notice.
Retiring as one of the top quarterbacks in the history of the game, while playing it with a zeal no other quarterback does (they’re too cool as a bunch), while playing in a very close team, and being a fan favorite seems like one of those time. I’d like to see Ingraham put on the pads and take a few shots from a high school linebacker, her point of view on life might just change.
Sub-topic: Should boys play football? Sure. The catastrophic injuries in football are usually seen at the higher level of the game. Junior high and high school students don’t have the size and/or speed (generally) to cause the grinding injuries that one sees in retired professional football players.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Alex, I think what he means is that Ingraham's message is as callous to boys as the one he has provided. What do you think?
I had to think about it for a bit.
March 17th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
That's not US telling us to be like that -- that's women.
You're wasting your time telling some feminists that. They will do one of two things:
Distance themselves from her and claim that, "She's not one of us." (which she may not be I don't know)
OR
Put up the patriarchy shield and claim that she only made such a remark because she was brainwashed by the partriarchy. You could prove something to be the fault of women beyond all doubt and they will just create doubt to justify their venom.
But we have to make sure not to blame just feminists for this one. This is the fault of everyone (men and women) that still holds on to such outdated gender expectations
March 17th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Great story Glenn, and great posts George, Tim Murray, and Patrick Brown and others I forgot to mention. This is a great boilerplate masculist topic about how males have far less freedom to deviate from their very restrictive gender role of male disposability.
Laura Ingram is a total hypocrite ingrate. Let's analyze the situation for a moment: she has a syndicated radio talk show, which 100 years would have been totally taboo for a woman. So what does she do? She lashes out, on her "traditionally male" airwaves, and criticises a man for essentially trying to have the same freedom.
I am not attracted to women like that at all. Looking at her is like looking at a tree.........no feelings........no attraction............just indifference.
The strange thing is that crying isn't even feminine behavior..........it is human behavior. Some research shows that little boys and little girls are equally as sensitive and emotional. It is sad how traditional gender roles stamp out the humanity in boys and give them the restrictive "boys code". Women do NOT have to measure up in this way. Research shows that parents tend to little boys less presumably in efforts to condition males for their disposable role.
Emotion is a female privilege.........and Laura is taking it for granted. I agree that she owes brett an apology.
MXY
March 17th, 2008 at 5:34 pm
Danny, that's OK that the feminists won't buy it. I don't care. The fact is, the vast majority of WOMEN think like that, and, no, they're not feminists. We spend so much time responding to feminists, and the fact is, their messge does not resonate beyond a very small segment of society. Sadly, in this case, because this sort of nonsense thinking has nothing to do with feminism. I also don't care if they want to attribute it to "the patriarchy." That term really has lost all meaning, it is so broad. My point, which I think is beyond dispute, is that WOMEN expect men to act a certain way -- men didn't tell them to expect it, and damn it, MEN are going to act that way because of our mating instinct. So feminists are wasting their time telling us how backward we are until women change.
Whether they agree with it is not really important. Ask 10 people on the street and 9 out of 10 will agree with this.
March 17th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
More Mars/Venus bullcrap. I wonder if Laura has EVER, in her life, cried about ANYTHING...
March 17th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
@MXY...
I agree that Laura owes Brett Favre an apology. I will go further and say she owes ALL men an apology.
During the eighties then Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke teared up while speaking to the media about his daughter's drug problems. While there were some muted criticisms the public response was quite understanding.
A couple of years ago an AFL footballer suffered a serious injury immediately after which he was shown on the sidelines struggling to restrain tears. He was broadly pilloried by men and women alike in what I considered an utterly shameless manner.
In this regard it seems we've gone backwards.
March 17th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Well, for the first time in a long time I - gack - visited Alas. I see they're still as ignorant and indifferent to men as ever.
March 17th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
I'm not so impressed with Jill and Barry's ersatz sympathy.
They'd be just fine if men were weeping puddles of emotional instability.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
"Alex, I think what he means is that Ingraham's message is as callous to boys as the one he has provided. What do you think?
I had to think about it for a bit."
Ah, I think you're right, George.
At least, I HOPE so.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
For some strange reason this man is getting all emotional at the idea of leaving a career that has meant a lot to him. So he wont be spending as much time with his mates as he used to, so the thing that has to a large extent defined him for most of his adult life is going to vanish into thin air at the tender age of 38, so his fans will move onto someone else, why the hell would anyone get emotional about that? Men, what a bunch of wimps!
Lets face it, crying because your latte is cold or because you cant get the printer to work, now that would be girly. And as tough as Dr Laura seems to be when i see her on O'Reilly, im sure she has in her adult life cried over things less consequential than retirement at 38, although i doubt lattes and printers would be on her list.
March 18th, 2008 at 2:40 am
I cried twice this week. I had a tears in my eyes Saturday when my autistic son Tim received the Arrow of Light, the highest award in Cub Scouts, and bridged over into his new Boy Scout troop. Tonight I cried with my other son when he was telling me about his 11 year old friend and classmate who was murdered by gang members last night. No one can tell me where and when to feel my emotions, or tell me what I have to do be a man.
March 18th, 2008 at 4:17 am
There's been a lot of comments worth disagreeing with on this post, but this one stands out: The next time I see a feminist refer to Laura Ingraham as a "sister" will be the first.
March 18th, 2008 at 4:48 am
Agreed.
I do give Glenn credit, although of course I still disagree with him a huge amount of the time.
Glenn, in turn, would probably give me credit for posting about sexism against men -- which I've done a bunch of times. But if he never gave me "credit," I would have blogged the exact same things.
That says, who cares about "credit"? I don't blog to earn credit from anyone. If I cared about what MRAs thought, I would have killed myself years ago (a course of action more than one MRA has suggested I take, by the way). The only people in the world who loathe me more than MRAs do are radical feminists. I don't do this to be loved.
Nor do I imagine for a second that Glenn writes for "credit." He's writing like I do: advocating for what he thinks is right. That, not "credit," is what counts. (A shame that Glenn takes the wrong side so much of the time -- although he's probably say the same about me.)
Yeah, right, like I make a living off this.
March 18th, 2008 at 7:20 am
MichaelClaymore: crying because your latte is cold or because you cant get the printer to work, now that would be girly.
No, that would be ridiculous. I think Laura's words are about restricting men, but the above is insulting and unfair to women. Let's be fair.
Tim Murray: I look forward to the day when there can be one Web site that isn't a special interest lobby for a particular gender -- but battles unhealthy gender stereotyping.
Tim I'm %100 with you on this. That whole post is great.
March 18th, 2008 at 10:10 am
This is why you shouldn't quote things out of context. Seems to me that a) the sarcasm is obvious (although it's sometimes hard to get that through in writing) and b) have you ever seen that sentiment (done seriously) posted, without challenge, by a feminist or pro-feminist at Pandagon?
Just so you guys can see the whole comment that I made on Pandagon:
“That’s a great message for young boys. ‘Get up there and act like a girl and start blubbering like a baby.
Yes, Laura. Because woman = baby. Good call and thanks for letting me know.
A better message for young boys would, undoubtedly, be, “You wanna cry? I’ll give you something to cry about!” Followed immediately by beating with a stick.
March 18th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Her comments are confusing to me. I thought that retirement was one of the socially accepted teary times? Like, the end of Old Yeller or when your mother dies, or one of your children is born or dies. I know there is a list somewhere of when it is ok to cry. Probably two lists actually...one is the traditional list, the one non feminists had input into. The new one probably reads more in line with PETA and NOW. Hell, I have seen Marines tear up at retirements...we going to say they are not manly now too? When you invest so much of yourself into one single thing, giving it up is like an amputation (not to insult amputees). It is a huge part of your life and it is just...gone. In my opinion there are 2 ways to go out, laughing or crying and I think there is a very fine line between the feelings that would trigger either.
March 18th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Did I say you wanted credit, Ampersand? My point was that Glenn ain't your garden variety men's rights activist. You may think he overreacts, or whatever the hell you think, but he's unfairly painted as this monster by your other enemies, the radical gender feminists. I certainly can't speak for him but I suspect Glenn's closer to the classic equity feminist than he'd care to admit, but he also believes that men are unfairly gender stereotyped in certain areas (e.g., family law court ). And, of course, Glenn shouldn't be judged by his commenters.
"Yeah, right, like I make a living off this."
With your site meter numbers, you could even be making a little money running Google ads. Get with it man.
March 18th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Laura Ingraham is a horse's ass! Laura, get a life! If Brett's a 'wimp', then all men should be so 'wimpy'.
March 18th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I did see your original post, Jake Squid. The meaning was not entirely clear. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
March 18th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Yeah, that's why I often put in the "/sarcasm" tag. I haven't figured out a foolproof way of written sarcasm stylings, yet.
March 18th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Jake, I didn't mean to quote you out of context. I didn't see how the rest of the post directly related to that part. It was an honest mistake.
George
March 19th, 2008 at 6:41 am
I don't think that the real meat of her reasoning has been approached. Laura is saying exactly what normal women feel and never tell you. It has never been acceptable in history, until the last half century, for men to cry in public. Although men have been taught during that period to be more sensitive and show emotion, that is not what women find themselves attracted to. She is not so much reasoning her comment to the audience, as much as she feels it and speaks in a way that supposedly justifies it.
I think that Laura is actually saying things to men that we need to hear. As far as women are concerned, men should be confident, secure, stable, and in control of their emotions. Stoicism is actually quite attractive at a primal level to them, and crying in public is totally unattractive at the same level.
It's not necessarily the fact that he is crying. It's more the amount of crying he's doing. If he would have choked up for a few seconds and gotten it under control, you would never have heard a word. That's not what he did.
Now, if you want to argue the point of the silliness of the whole "feelings" movement and how it is total irony that women say they want a man that is sensitive, but are only attracted to men that are real men in the stereotypical manner, then fine. On the other hand, I can't agree that she is wrong when you put it in the perspective of a woman.
March 19th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Timm:
"Laura is saying exactly what normal women feel and never tell you."
Exactly. This is what nearly all women really feel, even the ones who talk about wanting men to 'open up' about their feelings. What a load of crap that is.
Like I always say - "Yeah, right. When you and your man are stranded on an icy road in the middle of nowhere at four in the morning, that's what you want - you want to hear about his feelings."
It's my firm belief that what women want, in a very elemental sense, is a man who cans SOLVE PROBLEMS and GET THINGS DONE. Any guy who likes to talk about his feelings all the time but can't take care of business will not last long with any woman. (Why would he want to last with a Western woman anyway?) Western women are in great denial about this evolutionary fact, and it's killing their relationships with men.
In talking to men who are involved with women from other cultures (Asian or Oriental cultures, as a good example) and in watching how they interact, I've noticed something. Their women are not very interested in a man who can express his feelings. They're more concerned that a man is properly respectful (meaning he doesn't act like an animal) and can take care of business. If he's a capable individual, he gets his due respect from the woman. In turn, he treats his woman with due respect, and the relationship is a two way street. Conversely, the women (if they are not too Americanized), are extremely capable in their own right, and are more than able to step up and take care of things in a clutch. What's even more interesting is that I haven't seen any of these women act very deferentially toward their men. They do not cower or pander. In fact, they seem like very strong women.
I'm sure not all relationships with Asian and Oriental women are like this; what I'm suggesting is that perhaps Asian and Oriental women as a whole, particularly those who are not very Americanized, are more aware (at least unconsciously) of the evolutionary relationship between men and women. Maybe that's the real reason American men like them (in addition to the fact that they're slim and have nice skin and hair :-)
Of course, this response would draw ire from white, middle class/upper middle class American women, who are all jealous as hell of the attention that Asian and Oriental women get from American men. My answer to that response is this: perhaps men are interested in these women because they're not . . . YOU!
Really, though. The double bind that Western women have gotten themselves into with men is quite laughable. On the one hand, in a very Dr. Phil sense, women want men to 'share their emotions.' Then, when it comes time for us to 'Man Up' and take care of business, they want us to stifle our emotions. That explains my relationship with my ex-wife to a T. When money got tight and the bills still had to be paid, she wasn't interested in my emotions. She was interested in my going out and making more money. When it came time to talk about HER emotions, then she wanted me to become Mr. Emotional. Really, the "Men need to express their emotions" game doesn't have to do with men's emotions at all. It has to do with how we deal with WOMEN'S emotions. Women, in an evolutionary sense, could really care less about men's emotions. Any man who doesn't understand this is doomed in his relationships with women. (Read some Stephen Pinker.)
It's my belief that men can only do their emotional work effectively with other men. Robert Bly said this years ago. Of course, he was vilified for it - which was society's way of saying, "Look, we don't want men to be in touch with their feelings. We need men to clam up and get things done. You know, die in wars, play football, run businesses, lay thousands of people off with no moral pangs to keep the stock price high. To hell with your feelings, dude. Man up." Even the most touchy-feely book reviewers and new-age publications made fun of Bly. I was amazed. If women wanted men to 'Be in touch with their feelings,' why were they so instantly ready to jump on a man that had a plan (ANY plan) for them to do so?
The real answer is: Women want men to be in touch with WOMEN'S feelings.
So now, western women are in a real spot. On the one hand, they want Mr. Feelings. On the other hand, they decry the lack of 'Real Men.' Well, the answer to that is; you’ve taken all the Real Men and turned them into women.
Isn't this really a result of the western woman's 'I can have it all' ideology? I think it is. But I doubt any western woman has the courage to take a look at herself for the answer. No, it's all our fault, of course. We need to Man Up.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
"I think that Laura is actually saying things to men that we need to hear. As far as women are concerned, men should be confident, secure, stable, and in control of their emotions. Stoicism is actually quite attractive at a primal level to them, and crying in public is totally unattractive at the same level."
WHO CARES?
Really, who cares? Who CARES if women are "turned off" when a man is sad and cries? Brett Favre wasn't crying in order to impress women; he was doing it because it's a NATURAL REFLEX. I'm getting awfully tired of women who sit at a round table, coming to a decision as to how they want men to behave, as if men are waiting with their thumbs up their butts, patiently awaiting instructions.
Men and women are a lot more the same than they are different. And if it's okay for women to "let it out," then it's just as okay for men to do the same.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
"Their women are not very interested in a man who can express his feelings."
And why, exactly, would any man want such a woman? Folks, this shouldn't come as news to any man or woman here, but men DO have feelings and deserve the same chance to express them as women get expressing theirs.
"She was interested in my going out and making more money. When it came time to talk about HER emotions, then she wanted me to become Mr. Emotional. Really, the 'Men need to express their emotions' game doesn't have to do with men's emotions at all. It has to do with how we deal with WOMEN'S emotions."
There absolutely are women like this -- who want men to be "sensitive" to the women's own emotional needs but not have any emotional needs of their own. But rather than accept that, as Metalman and Timm seem to be doing, we should be calling those women onto the carpet for it. If they can't deal with the fact that men are human beings, too, and have all the feelings associated with being human, then those women can go toss off.
March 19th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
bmmg39:
There are some points I wish to address, which are perhaps off topic. If they are, my apologies in advance.
1) One of the things destroying our culture is our insistence, aided by quack mental health 'experts,' that our FEELINGS are the most important thing in the world. Contrary to popular belief, they are not. What is more important is our sense of Duty and Obligation. When we act according to our own (and, God forbid, to an EXTERNAL) sense of duty and obligation, we feel good about ourselves. We do not feel good about ourselves and then do good things. We do good things and then feel good about ourselves. This whole business of putting the cart in front of the horse has led an entire generation to commodify the notions of 'feelings' and 'emotions' as something we might purchase in a store to display at appropriate times in order to exhibit our mental well-being.
Yes, I would like the chance to express my deepest feelings. But when it comes to expressing my feelings as they relate to my experiences as a MAN, I will choose to do so with other MEN, who, being MEN, can hopefully guide me to greater realizations about myself. Choosing to do so with a woman would be, for me, like going to the hardware store for eggs. I do not need a woman to help me sort out my feelings as a MAN. Therefore, it is not a requirement for me that a woman be able to listen to me express all of my feelings.
Now, if my dog died, or if I were to cry during a speech in which I was bidding farewell to a group of long-known and long-loved colleagues, I would hope that any woman I was with understands. That would be a simple mark of DECENCY for her or any other human, and has nothing to do with vapid notions of allowing one to express one's feelings all willy-nilly with no other purpose than to hear them talk. (Of course one would have to dare to stray from moral relativism to define a notion of DECENCY to even agree with me on this point.)
Really, this "Let me express my feelings" culture is pure nonsense. It's allowed an entire generation to think that their feelings are paramount, and that all else comes second. The lack of critical ability in young people today is evidence of the fact that too many people around them concentrate on their 'feelings' and not enough on teaching them how to use their brains.
I believe that Favre cried because of the following: He is leaving behind the thing he’s known and loved for years. He is saying farewell to beloved friends and colleagues. He is departing from that which helped to define him and his own struggles for years. What man with a heart would not be saddened by this? What man with blood in his veins not be at least a little choked up at the idea of it?
Laura Ingraham is saying what society has always told men; “Shut up and get about your business.”
The point I’m trying to make here (in a roundabout way) is that how can you find a woman who is truly interested in your feelings in a positive way when the WHOLE OF SOCIETY teaches people that men’s feelings do not matter at all? Quite simply, you are telling me to look for something that does not, in fact, exist.
A primary theory of mine, gained from much experience, is this: A woman is interested in a man's feelings, as long as they do not threaten her own well-being.
When I told my ex-wife of the unfairness I felt at how bills were paid in our house, you can be sure that she became very non-accepting of my feelings. In other words; "I accept your feelings as long as I agree with them."
Nearly ALL western women play this game.
2) I actually did tell my ex-wife to go toss off. The problem is, in my experience, and in the experience of a great many men, 90% of women are like this. During my divorce, you can be sure my ex-wife suddenly became even more careless of my 'feelings.'
March 20th, 2008 at 2:07 am
"There absolutely are women like this -- who want men to be "sensitive" to the women's own emotional needs but not have any emotional needs of their own. But rather than accept that, as Metalman and Timm seem to be doing, we should be calling those women onto the carpet for it."
Would you get angry at someone for inhaling water when they drown? There are certain things that are programmed into our DNA. Nobody can control rationally their brain's desire to breathe forever, even if the rational side says it will breathe water and that surely means death. This is the same with the way people find attraction in others. People can rationally choose to ignore attraction due to facts they know, but they can't rationally convince themselves to find attraction where there isn't any in the first place.
Men have been dealing with our feelings for millennia without the need to blubber to women. We currently find ourselves in a society where feelings get priority over all else and we suddenly need women to understand ours?
We also seem to forget the fact that there is a proper amount of crying that can be tolerated. I usually find my heart melting when a woman cries, but I find myself getting uncomfortable when the crying continues for too long. I feel bad that they feel bad, but when it continues for long enough, I start looking for the exits.
This feelings crap is why divorce is so rampant. "He doesn't care enough about the way I feel, I need out of this relationship." How about this one, "I just don't feel I love him anymore." This type of thinking is what gets men in the situations that we end up in, and we want to adopt it for ourselves?
If you "sensitive" guys think about things for a minute, you'll notice that almost all of your relationships end with them leaving you, and when you cry to them to stay, it ends up in you getting the insensitive cold shoulder. You probably think those women are heartless. Actually, you reinforced their belief that you are undesirable by showing weakness and insecurity.
It's not a choice they make, it's a genetic mandate.
March 22nd, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Brett wept at his retiremen announcement? Big freakin' deal! So men aren't supposed to have feelings? I lost my best friend in the Grenada invasion. He died right in front of me! Anyone who claims to be a vet and doesn't cry at the loss of a buddy in battle is either a heartless, psychotic bastard or a lying SOB. Best wishes to Brett, he is the type of guy a kid can look up to, unlike a lot of prima donna/gangsta pro athletes we see in jail today!
March 26th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
metalman: "This whole business of putting the cart in front of the horse has led an entire generation to commodify the notions of 'feelings' and 'emotions' as something we might purchase in a store to display at appropriate times in order to exhibit our mental well-being."
I don't understand where you're going with this. I'm not arguing that people need to neglect getting the work of the world done so that they can have (and discuss) their feelings. You can easily do both. What I resent is the implication that it's okay for women to have (and discuss) their feelings, whereas men must internalize everything. You want to know why men have shorter lifespans? I'd point to that as one reason.
"I do not need a woman to help me sort out my feelings as a MAN."
Are you not both human beings? What difference does it make who helps you?
"The point I’m trying to make here (in a roundabout way) is that how can you find a woman who is truly interested in your feelings in a positive way when the WHOLE OF SOCIETY teaches people that men’s feelings do not matter at all? Quite simply, you are telling me to look for something that does not, in fact, exist."
No, what "society" says isn't the same as what every human being on earth says. On this very blog, we have men and women alike contradicting what "society" says about gender. I greatly sympathize with you for how you were emotionally mistreated by your ex, but I think it's a stretch that you're now generalizing "nearly all Western women" based on a sampling you've met personally.
Timm: "You probably think those women are heartless. Actually, you reinforced their belief that you are undesirable by showing weakness and insecurity."
...by behaving like a human being and not a robot, you mean...
"It's not a choice they make, it's a genetic mandate."
Is this a Mars/Venus argument on your part? Shall I go over once again how I feel about so-called "gender differences"?
March 27th, 2008 at 9:17 pm
"You probably think those women are heartless. Actually, you reinforced their belief that you are undesirable by showing weakness and insecurity."
Comparing Brett Favre's crying at his retirement speech to some sucker for love crying because his woman wants to leave is like comparing apples and bullets. Any ass who thinks that way would probably call him a wuss if they found out he may have cried at his father's funeral. A man expressing his feelings does not always mean crying or whining (which is not attractive for either gender.) After all, the man who rants, raves, and throws things is expressing himself as well right? Here's the thing, we cannot allow women to define manhood by saying things like "You're acting like a little girl" any more than they would let us define womanhood by saying " Take your shoes off, get in the kitchen, and wait for me to come in there and impregnate you.". Listen to them and you'll be confused.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Well, as typically happens my words have been taken out of context in order to argue with something totally out of line with what I said. I never said that crying was the issue. If you had read that post, you would know that. The guy sobbed for half an hour. I found it irritating as well. Choking up, letting out a tear, even pissing out your eyes is fine, and I never said it wasn't. What isn't fine is allowing it to continue for such a long period that people watching you get uncomfortable. That's the point where you become a weenie. Cry if you want to, about whatever you want to, but don't expect women or anyone to like it if you let it get out of control. Self control does extend to emotions.
Now, I hope that anyone else that wants to quote me doesn't forget the context in which it was originally written. It's easy to take a few words and mislead others who may not have read the original post to think I am saying don't cry at all. I never did, and you are being dishonest.
March 28th, 2008 at 12:11 am
"What isn't fine is allowing it to continue for such a long period that people watching you get uncomfortable...Self control does extend to emotions."
Only to an extent. Crying, just like laughing, is an involuntary reflex. Yes, it's possible to make yourself cry by digging a saved letter out of a drawer, or watching a sad film, or whatever, but more often it's a case of one's reflexes getting the better of him/her. Telling someone not to cry, or not to cry so much, or not to "cry like that" is like ordering someone not to laugh or yawn.
March 28th, 2008 at 5:21 am
Crying just happens to people? You compare it to gagging, or making sure you don't drop whatever is in your hands when you fall. Those are reflexes. Reflexes happen in split seconds. Crying for half an hour is not a reflex, it's a reaction. It is a completely voluntary reaction. Everyone has had that moment in their lives that they really felt like crying, but didn't. They made a conscious effort to stem the tearflow.
March 28th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Timm
When you are secure in your own manhood, you don't have to worry about what people will think should you feel the need to cry. The people who know (Or just admire) this guy didn't think any less of him. If he would get on camera and cry every time the Packers were knocked out of the playoffs, or lost a big game, you might have a valid point, but you don't.
"Laura is saying exactly what normal women feel and never tell you."
Whoever said these women were normal?
Your words were not taken out of context, more like they wwere spoken out of context in the first place.