Wampum

so i clicked on the du toit link, and the following text appeared:

Incidentally, as of 1:00am 11/5, I'd received about 54 responses to the essay [uh...huh], 49 of them positive. You do the math.

people who email him are dumb-asses. also, your math is done.

Posted by: roop at November 11, 2003 08:57 AM

also, being a man, whose only problem with queer eye is that weird thing they have against mono-brows, i'm just reading du toit's "essay", and having the time of my life. i've learnt, amongst other things:

• cowboys n' indians is apparently "a variation" of good guys vs. bad guys.
• it's wrong to tell men that violence is bad. apparently violence is good. yay violence!
• it's wrong to be drugging-up of little boys with ritalin. just keep on sedating them girls, though.
• apparently "the process of male pussification" in europe "is almost complete". also, men in italy.
• it sucks that women ever won the vote ["America is...a culture dominated by one figure: Mother. It wasn't always so: there was a time when it was Father who ruled the home, worked at his job, and voted"]. of course, fathers still vote, so this can only mean...
• single-motherhood is akin to a punishment ["You know what? Some women deserve to be single moms" (emphasis in original, which applies to all quotes)]. this comment reflects an odd conception of either punishment or parenting, i'm not sure which. also, the information i have to the effect that some women want -- or at least prefer -- to be single mothers, is apparently wrong. thanks for clearing that up, du toit.
• gays are "butt-bandits", in that they are apparently guilty of butt-banditry. fuck i hate bandits.
• i haven't been in a fight for ten years. therefore, i am not a man [anatomy notwithstanding].
• advertising execs are "girly-men". also, john singleton [will only make sense to australians, but surely other countries have domestic equivalents to this guy...king-pin of the advertising industry; think compulsive womaniser, driver of fast cars, advertiser of beers and anything else that requires ads with scantily-clad women etc].
• jim belushi was a man, and not a woman. i had no idea.
• condoleeza rice is a man, and not a woman. again, i had no idea. in fact, i'm still not sure about this.
• the government should be harder on people ["I want our government to be more like Dad -- kind, helpful, but not afraid to punish us when we fuck up, instead of helping us excuse our actions"]. also, incarceration rates hit record highs.
• men are simpletons, and glorify in that fact ["Never mind that it's simplistic -- we like simple, we are simple, we are men"].
• being a "real man", it's still ok to read "literature" ["I want our literature to become more male, less female"]. can someone tell me why that feels so counter-intuitive?
• if you're a "real man", treating women like objects is good. unless of course you're muslim "real man", in which case it's bad, and you'd better stop before we bomb your country.
• that the raping of women by young men is a "reaction" against the pussification of society or some such. not only is this an extremely odd, not to mention offensive, variation of blaming-the-victim, but the nugget of truth that it contains [ie, women being raped] would tend to suggest that the pussification of society is in fact rather a long way from completion.
• to attract women, i need to dress up in "a naval aviator's uniform", like the swoon-inducing george bush. so we're for playing military dress-up, yet we hate them butt-bandits. your ideas are intriguing to me, and i would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

i mean jeebus. the funniest thing i read all day. people kept sending me the link, and i kept seeing it on blogs, but i didn't read it, which i now see was a mistake.

incidentally, at one point in his rant, du toit notes a fact. he tries, and fails, to fit it into his argument. that fact is stereotypical dichotomy of the perfect, rock-like wife, as against the flawed, comically-inept husband, both of whom you see so often in sitcoms, that is if you actually watch sitcoms, which you really shouldn't cause they suck. anyway, it seems to me that rather than being tough on and badgering toward men, this stereotype essentially gives them and their foibles a pass, even when they're complete dumb-asses [think homer simpson, for example]. so on the one hand, the stereotype says to men, it's ok to not be perfect.

for women, on the other hand, the stereotype practically mandates that they live up to an impossible ideal. home improvement, to take du toit's example, casts the pa as a loveable rogue, who gets to spend all his time playing with his toys, at "work" and at home, while the ma raises the kids, cooks the meals, puts up with pa being a moron, solves his problems for him, solves the kids' problems for them etc.

you tell me, how does this fit the point of his "essay"? i'm a little confused.

and finally, "We know what the word "is" means." yes, but do you know the meaning of the word "imminent"?

Posted by: roop at November 11, 2003 11:02 AM

also, it appears i shouldn't've read that essay after all:

Here's a newsflash to the Perpetually Indignant and Girly-Men: This essay was not directed at you. I could give a flying fuck what you think about me, or about John Wayne, or the President, or guns, or How Wonderful We Are Since We've Become Civilized. As such, your opinions are irrelevant -- in fact, your foul opinion of these issues is half the problem."

he's preaching to the converted. good for him.

Posted by: roop at November 11, 2003 11:07 AM

I've been paying about as much attention to hoity-Toit as I did to the Luskin stalking thing - it's all so insider, y'nkow? plus, it gives idiots attention they don't deserve - but I did want to compliment you on this post anyway, Dwight. Definitely hitting-nail-on-head time.

Posted by: Elayne Riggs at November 11, 2003 06:01 PM

Yeah, that was definitely high school locker room "man"hood. When you shine a bright light on throwbacks like him everyone can see what pinheads they are. The sad thing is that there are other people in the world who think the way he does.

Posted by: Trish Wilson at November 12, 2003 08:44 AM

You know, this is the second time this week I've run into the human life as punishment trope (the first was in the usual "I'm only pro-life if she had sex on purpose" wrappings).

I can't imagine anyone who thinks that a child is a punishment for misbehavior actually raising one, and I can't imagine what it must be like growing up as mother's little horde of locusts.

Gives a whole new dimension to "suffer the little children"

Posted by: julia at November 13, 2003 10:17 AM

The lurkers support him in email!?
He's actually using that as a defense?

It's been over five years since Jo Walton wrote her famous filk on that phrase to the tune of 'My Bonny lies over the ocean'. May I suggest a rousing chorus in his honor?

Posted by: Lis at November 13, 2003 05:28 PM

"Kim duToit". Did this person feel he had something to prove in junior high, perhaps?

Posted by: raboof at November 13, 2003 11:11 PM

Smith doesn't really know any gay folks, methinks, or else he wouldn't have said that gay guys would know what women want. Studies show that gay guys have more in common with straight guys than with women (ie, losing interest in sex after orgasm, et cet.). There are plenty of gay guys who likewise could use a Queer Eye for the Queer Guy lotsa free merchandise makeover!

ps: MT really ought to flag required fields in comment forms. The duToits.

Posted by: nother queer at November 15, 2003 09:49 PM