FOX News and Michael Jackson Prove: Only a Feminized Society Can Be Obsessed With Singing And Dancing

By garyganu
July 1, 2009 - 13:38 ET

I don't understand why over 90% of all news coverage on FOX News was devoted to Michel Jackson last Thursday and Friday. I was disappointed that Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly were preempted by coverage of Jackson's death which had no new information to add over the course of 2 days. As Glenn Beck repeatedly said: "the latest update reported that Michael Jackson is still dead".

Having said that, Michael Jackson was a troubled soul who could sing and dance extremely well. I don't understand why our culture places such a high value on singing and dancing.

Let me repeat that because this truly puzzles me. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY OUR CULTURE PLACES SUCH A HIGH VALUE ON SINGING AND DANCING. In my humble opinion, this is a sign of our society has become feminized.

On Friday there was virtually no news coverage on what might become the most significant legislation in Americas history. The House passed the "Cap and Trade" bill by a narrow margin. If this legislation is passed by the Senate, it will become the largest tax increase in US history. Also, it gives the federal government virtually limitless powers over the way that Americans live their lives.

IMHO, only a feminized public would be more interested in singing and dancing than the future of their country. FOX News was just giving the public what they wanted to see. If they did not give Jackson's death wall-to-wall coverage, many viewers would have simply found it elsewhere. However, I still blame FOX news for not having the integrity of covering the news on Thursday and Friday. FOX News should call itself FOX entertainment, because that is what it has proved itself to be.

Back to Jackson. Jackson's life is just another example that proves that an abusive childhood can cause mental disorders, including deviant sexual desires such as attraction to children and/or attraction to the same sex. IMHO, sexual deviants, like homosexuals, pedophiles, those with fetishes like cross dressing and S&M behavior, aren't born that way, but they are damaged emotionally in their early childhood which permanently alters their sexual desires.

Although Jackson was acquitted on all child molestation charges, Jackson has admitted that he has an affinity for children and he enjoys sleeping in the same bed as children and sees nothing wrong with this behavior (it is normal for him).

Also, Jackson found some legal loopholes that enabled him to purchase his own children by paying a woman (his wife at the time) to undergo in vitro fertilization and then turning the children over to him for adoption. Apparently, he chose not to conceive children like normal people do in order to have a family. As far as I know, he didn't have homosexual partner either. It appears that he was attracted only to children. However, it appears that he has not acted upon any illegal and/or immoral sexual relations with children. He was able to restrain himself, according to all indications in these abnormal sexual desires.

This proves two things:
1) Abusive childhood can lead to deviant sexual desires.
2) Deviant sexual desires can be controlled.

Posted by garyganu at 10:24 AM 0 comments

‹ Galactica Conclusio Philosophicus Generation Of Christian Leaders Riding Into Sunset Spark Reevaluation ›

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

You know what, Gary?

July 1, 2009 - 18:41 ET by Blonde

I, for one, am sick and tired of your incessant spamming of the forums with your mysoginistic bullshit.

Get a grip, get a life, or post like a regular person.

But you, fella....are a sad sack.

Divorce...oh yeah, I thought about posting on that too....."Girls Just Wanna Have Fun".

Do me a favor and bugger off.

 

I hope he fails, too.

 

 

Oh yeah.....

July 1, 2009 - 18:42 ET by Blonde

And if you hate women so much...why don't you go hang out with your son, or your brother, or your cousin charles.

Sheesh....you are bugging me to death.

 

I hope he fails, too.

 

 

Blonde - ditto.  It's

July 5, 2009 - 21:07 ET by Radical1979

Blonde - ditto.  It's pretty horrific that Gary seems to blaming the ills of the world on women.  He must have very few interactions with very few women.

I have to say

July 5, 2009 - 21:22 ET by MrShy

I'm starting to think Gary's not totally off-base with some of what he says... :p (but then, I personally have my issues with women these days. :))

But in the arena of politics, no, both sexes are equally adept at leading, and there's been plenty of precedence. And I certainly don't see this as being some gender/societal tipping point that will ruin any kind of long-standing balance.

 

Mr. Shy like I said to Gary,

July 5, 2009 - 21:47 ET by Radical1979

Mr. Shy like I said to Gary, I think this crap is the fault of psychologists who want to tell us all how to behave.  Despite the ability to be nurturing, women can be pretty darn good at keeping kids in line, as long as no one is in there correcting them and telling them they are harming their child's self esteem. 

NOW and sister groups with

July 5, 2009 - 21:53 ET by bigtimer

NOW and sister groups with the msm and the educational system in this country have done a pretty good job of demeaning and doing their best to belittling men ...they still are trying...it gets more than aggravating...it is maddening at times...I'm 54, a gal and I've watched it happen over time...glad I raised my son differently.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

bt I completely agree with

July 5, 2009 - 22:10 ET by Radical1979

bt I completely agree with about NOW and some of these other groups demonizing men.  My problem is that I think Gary is demonizing women.  When I think back to women 100 years ago, my grandmother and my husbands grandmother, these women weren't "feminine" in the way Gary talks about.  They had a different role than men, but they were just as tough emotionally.  They also worked very hard physically, doing laundry by hand, cooking (much harder from scratch), hauling water for gardens, etc.  These women nurtered their children for the first few years of life, then started to toughen them up and had them working with them. 

I believe what happened was that "intellectuals" starting in the 1950's weakened our culture by telling mothers their behavior was wrong and redefining the role of a good mother.  So the atrributes Gary is attributing to being feminine, really aren't in my opinion.  That is my objection to his argument. 

My kids are in their late teens and I no longer nurture either one of them.  I'm getting ready to kick them out of the nest, for their own good! 

Rad... Oh you will be

July 5, 2009 - 22:20 ET by bigtimer

Rad...

Oh you will be surprised...you are going to be nurturing them in ways you don't understand yet for the rest of your life...but you will see...trust me.

My great-grandmother marched in Illinois for the right for women to vote...I was raised in a tough life too...not getting into this...I know what the past and present are regarding women...how about men too?

To throw the word misogyny at gary to me is uncalled for..it gets thrown around a lot easily anymore...and I find it sad.

Just my opinion...he made some excellent points here...simple as that...I don't see where he is trying to be a woman hater whatsoever.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

BT, I'm sure you're

July 5, 2009 - 22:32 ET by Radical1979

BT, I'm sure you're right.  I've learned what other people have experienced with their children is a peek at my future...

My interpretation of Gary's post was that he used "feminizing" to describe many undesirable aspects of our culture.  I guess I feel there is a lack of respect towards women there.  Those are just my feelings.

Trust me, I have huge respect for what my male ancestors have done and gone through, as well as what my husband does for me on a daily basis (number one he's no Mark Sanford!!).

This topic can like racism, because of the extremes of one side, i.e. NOW, things seem more skewed than they should be.

I'm one of those women who believes women's liberation has done more to hurt women in our society than anything else.  But I still don't like it when I percieve women as being the downfall of our culture.

I never took what gary

July 5, 2009 - 22:51 ET by bigtimer

I never took what gary meant as a put down to women...he was talking about what we have become as a nation...the feminization of our culture by all I have mentioned above and elsewhere over time...he meant it as a whole, not one woman in particular...know what I mean?

Heck Rush and many conservatives have talked about this...Phyllis Schaffley was on the war path for years about this...Pagilla is another to listen to regarding this issue..lots of people have.

We have all posted what Gary is talking about here a lot over the years...sometimes people love to gang up on someone who is trying to be genuine, not rude and explain what he or she means...and then still gets trounced on by same people.

Gets old.

I am a proud gal...and men are men, and we are different...thank God.

And NOW and sister groups have hurt our society as a whole in so many ways since the 60's..but it can be undone...and will...eventually.

I've read garys work over time...he is no woman hater...and misogny gets thrown too many times too quickly now and then in my opinion against others people don't like or want to pick a fight with..just for the sake of it..showing how tough one is on this board does not make one tough in real life....woman or man.

Know where I'm coming from...I hope?

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Nope, not with this violence

July 1, 2009 - 19:06 ET by general company

 IMHO, only a feminized public would be more interested in singing and dancing than the future of their country.

 I think it is just the opposite, we could benefit from some of this. I am a man, a serious Man. But I am convinced the problem is lack of responsibility, meaning to much testosterone. Sport figures are held up pretty damd high as well, (not much feminising there) paid attention to the salaries latley?

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Actualy

July 1, 2009 - 19:16 ET by general company

This is a huge issue, when we took the woman out of our home and put her in the work place, sociaty has crumbled. The Woman kept the peace in the communitee, they kept up with the kids, kept the community in touch. The knew everone, who needed help, who had a baby, who's kid belong to who. Since we took our Woman and forced them in the work place, our crime and drop out rates have skyrocketed. No matter what you think, the Woman is the rock. Many ways tougher, many ways our better.

 

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Yes, general company, You finally get it.

July 1, 2009 - 21:59 ET by garyganu

Now try and explain this to blonde.

This is a huge issue, when we took the woman out of our home and put her in the work place, sociaty has crumbled. The Woman kept the peace in the communitee, they kept up with the kids, kept the community in touch. The knew everone, who needed help, who had a baby, who's kid belong to who. Since we took our Woman and forced them in the work place, our crime and drop out rates have skyrocketed. No matter what you think, the Woman is the rock. Many ways tougher, many ways our better.

I am not being misogynistic. I do not hate women. I just understand that women and men are intrinsically different, with different strengths and weaknesses. Men and women must complement and restrain each other or else we are doomed. Men and women both have unique abilities that serve themselves, their families and our society best. Men and women are not interchangeable in any way shape or form. 

Masculinity and femininity should both be honored for what they bring to the table and they should both be admonished for what they try to get away with.

Human nature leaves both men and women imperfect in perfectly different ways.

Finally?

July 1, 2009 - 22:32 ET by general company

My comments are in contradiction to yours, but you agree? I suggested that our society is far from being feminized, exactly what you claim. So whats with the "finally" reference.

 

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

General, your previous

July 2, 2009 - 07:29 ET by garyganu

General, your previous comment pointed out certain innate strengths of women.

You agree that men and women have different strengths and weaknesses. The positive attributes should be supported, commended and reinforced. You have done exactly that in your previous comment.

Why is it that when I point out innate flaws in women, that need to be restrained, it is called misogyny? Would I get the same reaction by pointing out innate flaws in men?

I have never heard people attack reporters when they assume that escaped criminals, rapists and child molesters are men.

You see, the bias is one sided. That is my point. This is evidence of the feminizing of our society.

Your previous comment pointed out female attributes. Why am I chastised when I point out female detriments?

I'll thank you very much to respond to me.

July 4, 2009 - 22:30 ET by Blonde

Good grief, man!!!!  More of your mysoginistic blather....you respond to someone else and attempt to address my points....but not respond directly to me?  That is extremely rude.

Why don't we try this?   You may respond directly to me, in my original entry on YOUR forum topic, or you may begin the discussion forthwith.  Either way is fine with me.

Point-counter-point.  I would hope you remember this from the old Saturday Night Live.  If it makes you feel better, you may refer to me as "Jane, You Magnificently Ignorant Slut" and I'll shall refer to you as "Dan".  Fair enough?

So, you may start.  You may attempt to prove your thesis, to wit:

OUR CULTURE PLACES SUCH A HIGH VALUE ON SINGING AND DANCING. In my humble opinion, this is a sign of our society has become feminized.

. . . . 

IMHO, only a feminized public would be more interested in singing and dancing than the future of their country.

Carry on....I'm dying to hear how we women have turned our society into one big freakin' chick flick.

 

I hope he fails, too.

 

 

Blonde.

July 5, 2009 - 19:22 ET by garyganu

I ignored your previous comments because they were very insulting and sarcastic. Your previous comments contained personal attacks rather than objective criticism about the content of my post.

I do not respond to comments that are not made in good faith. I define good faith as: "believing what you write to be true, and writing in a civil manner".

There are numerous examples of how our society has become feminized. The most recent and obvious is how the network news has become "more entertainment and less like hard news". For two days following Jackson's death, 93% of all cable news coverage was devoted to Michael Jackson. There happened to be very important news going on and it was not being covered. The Cap and trade bill was passed in the "house" late Friday night. It was a cliffhanger. There was also much international news from Iran, Honduras, Korea and Iraq, yet 93% of cable news was devoted to Jackson's death. The tabloid mentality of the network news is a phenomenon that I have watched evolve over my 53 year lifespan. IMHO, I believe that it is evidence of the feminization of our society because women are usually much more interested in gossip than men are.

Unfortunately, I see today's men taking up many traits that used to be the province of women. This is what I mean by the "feminization of society".

Here are some more examples that I copied from my article: "The Feminizing of Society"  

  • Natural male aggressiveness, curiosity and mischievousness is discouraged. Boys that act too much like boys, are often diagnosed with ADD and subdued with psychotropic medications such as Ritalin.
  • In the past, it was usually the fathers role to physically discipline children. It was the mothers role to protect them. In today's feminized culture, corporal punishment of children has been stigmatized and outlawed in most cases. Everyone protects children, but no one is likely to discipline them.
  • Men are encouraged to be more sensitive. They are told that it is OK for men to cry.
  • Competition is discouraged. In school sports, most all participants are recognized with awards and trophies, whether they are on the winning or losing team.
  • Men are becoming more vane with regards to their physical appearance. It has become commonplace for men to wear jewelry, dye their hair and wear sexy clothing.
  • Seductive clothing and behavior is unrestrained in both women and men.
  • Today's popular culture has a mother's instinct, who wants her children to be safe at all costs. Our soldiers are regarded as victims, rather than courageous heroes, willing to risk their lives in a selfless effort to protect women and children on the home front for a noble cause greater than themselves.
  • Often, honesty plays second fiddle to self-esteem. Dishonesty is OK if it spares hurt feelings. Self esteem often trumps brutal honesty, regardless of the unintended consequences.
  • Often, political persuasion relies heavily on emotion, rather than reason. Symbolism over substance is the mainstay of many political campaigns. Slogans such as "I can feel your pain" or I stand for "hope" are common political rhetoric.
  • Creating class envy between rich and poor, minority and majority, men and women, gay and straight, legal citizen and illegal alien, have become common political strategies. Jealousy and envy are emotions that are often played upon by a feminized society.
  • Often, TV shows and commercials portray women as cool, smart and stylish, while traditional men are portrayed as clumsy and stupid. But, if the men are feminized in appearance and emotional sensitivity, they are also portrayed as cool and smart.
  • Hunting, fishing ,eating meat, and using animals' hides for clothing, is often considered cruelty to animals. A more sensitive, emotional and feminized approach, is not to harm any living thing.

    • P.S. I found an interesting article that confirms my opinion about dance being a predominantly feminine interest. This gay friendly article cites statistics that over 50% of professional male dancers are gay. Gay men do take on many feminine attributes. Interest in dance is one of them. Here is the link: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Gay+men+&+dance:+what's+the+connection-a0154003601 

    I base my views on reason, personal experience and common sense  http://garyganu.blogspot.com

    PWND

    July 5, 2009 - 19:39 ET by Free Stinker

    Oh great.  We just recentlt got rid of a ten paragraph spammer, now a new one pops up to take his place.

    Besides that fact that you are upset that Blonde PWND you, what is your point?

    free stinker

    July 5, 2009 - 20:23 ET by garyganu

    Technically, you are the spammer because you are not commenting on the topic of this forum.

    Why are you being confrontational and insulting?

    I base my views on reason, personal experience and common sense  http://garyganu.blogspot.com

    Why are you being

    July 5, 2009 - 20:59 ET by Free Stinker

    Why are you being confrontational and insulting?

    I could ask you the same thing, but I won't.

    gary... You have made

    July 5, 2009 - 21:30 ET by bigtimer

    gary...

    You have made some excellent points here...that many of us here over the years have posted about and agree with.

    You are not alone...not by a long shot.

    Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

    Gary, I have to disagree

    July 5, 2009 - 21:43 ET by Radical1979

    Gary,

    I have to disagree with what you say.  In my house and most of my contemporaries the mother did the corporal punishment.  She wasn't going to wait around all day for the dad to come home to get the kids to behave, she took care of business right away.  And moms were tough, there was no self esteem unless you earned it, and then you didn't get much.  All that stuff is not the feminizing of society, it's the psychologists trying to change society.  Those are the people telling parents not to get mad at their kids and teachers not to tell kids when they're wrong.  Don't blame women for this, blame Dr. Spock.

    You are mistaken in your premise

    July 5, 2009 - 23:21 ET by Blonde

    (Jolly good, BTW....nice intro.  And yes, that was sarcasm).  Your post deserved my sarcasm, and although I understand why it may have upset you, I'm not backing off.  As for your "good faith" comment, had I not cared to engage in a dialogue, I'd not have responded at all.  So much for that attempted put-down of yours (hmmm.....good faith?).

    Before I get into my argument, you should understand that I find the wall-to-wall coverage of the freak show that was Michael Jackson to be gross in the extreme.  Enough said.

    You've obviously ignored my proposal, however, which was a "point/counter point" discussion.  I'm not going to respond to the entire reiteration of your Blog post.  So let us start at the beginning.  I shall offer two points, not a stream-of-conciousness list, mind you.  You may then refute.

    Your basic premise was this:  The wall-to-wall coverage of Michael Jackson's death is indicative of the feminization of our society, to wit, IMHO, only a feminized public would be more interested in singing and dancing than the future of their country.

    (1)  Your premise is flawed.  It is not the "feminized public" who is more interested in this type of coverage, it is the perception of those who present the news that celebrity news sells.

    Whose decision is it to engage in tabloid-style journalism?  The consumer, or the producer? 

    (2)  If it bleeds, it leads.  Does this sound like some sort of feminine mantra to you?  I don't think so.  Train-wreck journalism rules the day.  Scandal sells (or does so in the minds of those who produce the news).  It has nothing whatsoever to do with the masculine/feminine attributes which define us. 

    Purient interest....that is at the core of the Jacko News Orgy. 

    So, kindly explain to me how "purient interest" is a more feminine than masculine trait?  

    Okay, Dan, your turn.

     

    I hope he fails, too.

     

     

    blonde

    July 6, 2009 - 10:15 ET by garyganu

    I am uncomfortable with the way you are setting the rules and tone of our discussion. I perceive it as bossy. The cliche "who died and left you in charge" comes to mind.

    I believe that calling a woman an "ignorant slut", even in jest, is demeaning and misogynistic. Why do you think that it is OK for a man to call a woman a slut? Is it OK for a white man to call a black man a ni*ger.

    I admit that my answer to your original question was verbose and all inclusive. I did this because I thought perhaps we might have more in common than you think after I made my position clear.

     However, I did address you original question at the end of my post and you did not address it.

     "OUR CULTURE PLACES SUCH A HIGH VALUE ON SINGING AND DANCING. In my humble opinion, this is a sign of our society has become feminized."

    This was my response:

    P.S. I found an interesting article that confirms my opinion about dance being a predominantly feminine interest. This gay friendly article cites statistics that over 50% of professional male dancers are gay. Gay men do take on many feminine attributes. Interest in dance is one of them. Here is the link: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Gay+men+&+dance:+what's+the+connection-a0154003601 

    I agree that the news networks are just giving the public what they want. The Jackson coverage had great ratings. This is a sign that the public has become feminized, because most people watching "news programs" would rather be entertained by tabloid type gossip, rather than be informed by hard news. The networks are just giving the public what it wants.

    I base my views on reason, personal experience and common sense  http://garyganu.blogspot.com

    Gary

    July 6, 2009 - 12:59 ET by Blonde

    Obviously you never watched the hillarious original SNL "Point/Counter Point" with Jane Curtain and Dan Ackroyd.  Dude, it was a joke, try not to be so humorless.

    Your opinion is obviously not so humble, as you state, since you blatently ignored my point, which I shall repeat.  Your premise is flawed.  To begin a discussion without me raising my objection to your basic premise (and you ignoring my objection out of hand) is the equivalent of me stipulating to your point.  Which I shall not do.   I don't particulary care if you find my style bossy or not....your complaint, though, as a tactic for trying to dictate the terms of the argument, I find rather off-putting and juvenile.

    Having said that, since you have chosen to focus on another point I'll address that one next.

    "OUR CULTURE PLACES SUCH A HIGH VALUE ON SINGING AND DANCING. In my humble opinion, this is a sign of our society has become feminized."

    The link you've cited has absolutely nothing to do with the feminization (so-called by you) of society.  Gay men are not women, just as lesbians are not men.   That argument is a non-starter....that dog won't hunt. 

    You are going to have to find something to support your statement that "our culture places such a high value on singing and dancing". 

    In this article, concerning American's preferences for leisure time activities, singing and dancing (we could call it music for the sake of convenience...but I wouldn't want to be accused of changing the topic) doesn't hit the top ten. 

    (I tried to insert the graph here, but the formatting won't hold).  Top ten leisure activities are (in order):  Reading; TV; Spending Time w/Family; Excercise, Computer activites; Fishing, Going to movies; Golf; Walking; Gardening.

    Further, I would point out that you have confused feminization of our society with the liberalization of the same.  They are not interchangeable.

    Now, if "singing and dancing" is entertainment, then our preferences can more easily broken down by, and correlated to, our politics, rather than our genders, as evidenced by this study.

    I also found this site, which has entertainment industry trends and market research information. 

    Either way, "singing and dancing" as a leisure activity or an entertainment form, does not rank so high in our culture as you so vociferously maintain....particularly not as an indicator of the feminization of our society.  

    I have debunked your premise.  Your turn.

     

    I hope he fails, too.

     

     

    let's go over this in detail

    July 6, 2009 - 00:34 ET by candance

    • I know just as many girls on Ritalin these days. That problem is not reserved for rambunctious boys.

    • My mother was infamous for taking a switch to my legs just as often, if not more, than my dad.

    • It's not okay for men to cry? So they should what, bottle emotions up inside and then go fight someone in a bar to release it?

    • Competition is a masculine trait? You mean girls don't get competitive over a cute boy, a cheerleading contest, or becoming valedictorian? Girls are every bit as competitive as men.

    • Men were not vain in the olden days? Are you sure? Historical accounts are full of stories about generals and noblemen who walked around like they were in a painting.

    • Seductive clothing means we're more feminized. Right, because there were no Playboys before the 60s.

    • It's weak and motherly to want troops to be protected? Gee, so I guess the calls to end the Civil War after thousands of needless deaths, that was a sissy reaction.

    • Self esteem is now more important than honesty. Unlike in the olden days when the Biblical texts recorded people being dishonest.

    • Emotion is suddenly the substance of our politics? Wait, you mean Chamberlain didn't run on a platform of "peace in our time" and the French Revolution was not based on angry masses bumrushing the Bastille? FDR didn't use photos of starving babies to defeat Hoover?

    • Jealousy and envy are feminine traits. That's why commonism promoted them so heavily. That's why Shakespeare repeatedly assigned them to men and coined the phrase "green eyed monster" to describe it. That's why the Bible deals a lot with men who are jealous of their neighbor's wife.

    • I agree with you about the media making women look smart over men. However the media sides with the minority by default, whether they be female, or a racial thing, always against the white male. That's more of a "stick it to the man" thing.

    • Yet another silly stereotype. I know a lot of women who enjoy hunting and fishing. Watch Food Network for five minutes and see the way Rachael Ray or Paula Deen gush about a well-cooked steak. PETA employs as many men as women.

    • So now we're using gay propaganda to advance an argument on NB?

     

    well well

    July 5, 2009 - 23:54 ET by candance

    I see that Gary's personal blog hasn't gotten any traction, so he's copypasting stuff onto NB for more exposure.

    Singing and dancing have been mainstays in western society for centuries. Fred Astaire danced like an angel. Shakespeare wrote some of the most gushy, romantic drivel some women could never imagine. Mozart and Beethoven composed sweepingly emotional music. That stuff was *always* popular. And nations have *always* turned to the arts when politics became too heavy or depressing. You think life in Gershwin's time was all fun and games? What about Elvis? Buddy Holly? Were their fans a bunch of girlie men?

    The gist of this whole piece is that singing and dancing are "sissy" things to do. Anyone who thinks that has never tried to sing or dance professionally. Things like ballet and figure skating are tough physical sports. Being a professional musician takes business savvy, hours of labor, and a very thick skin to take criticism. Gary seems to have this idea that Jackson woke up, rolled out of bed, and did a dance routine on stage.

    As someone else here pointed out, our culture places high value on athletics, acting, and a whole list of other things besides politics. Yes politics are important, but the human experience really is broader than that.

    This whole thing smacks of historal ignorance and direct condescention toward women.

    "Shakespeare wrote some of

    July 6, 2009 - 00:00 ET by MrShy

    "Shakespeare wrote some of the most gushy, romantic drivel some women could never imagine."

    Let's not forget Mr. Shy.

     

    LOL MrS.... Boy have you

    July 6, 2009 - 00:50 ET by bigtimer

    LOL MrS....

    Boy have you ever got that right....how could anybody forget your great artistic work, prose, voice, etc. etc.

    I know I love your talent and work....it's appreciated by me.

    Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

    BT

    July 6, 2009 - 00:57 ET by MrShy

    Thank you BT!!

    Your support for the music is very much appreciated :) It's hard to come by... and us insecure artists can never get enough! :p

     

    MrS... I know...I

    July 6, 2009 - 01:00 ET by bigtimer

    MrS...

    I know...I know...have some knowledge of that in my family and life otherwise...no need to go there.

    I spread it around for all though MrS...when I can...great music is medicine for the soul, in more ways than one.

    Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

    Gary has a point. I

    July 6, 2009 - 01:06 ET by RR GOP

    Gary has a point.

    I wonder what percentage of the male population in this country is "raised" solely by women? 

    You can't even call most of these twenty-somethings out there 'men' in the traditional sense.  They wear jewelry and sometimes hair like women , they can't take criticism, they pout and throw tantrums when they don't get their way, they want people to think they're pretty...some sort of weird androgenous ego hidden under a masculine, probably tattooed, earringed exterior thing going on.

    But look at primitive cultures and what we know about our ancestors from tens of thousands of years ago.  Men do excel in the arts...men do like dance, music, poetry and theater, and they don't (believe it or not) have to be gay or effeminate to do so.  Look at how 'girlish' those aristocrats dressed and acted hundreds of years ago.  Call one of them a 'woman' at it would be swords or pistols at dawn.

    Civilation itself negates many natural manly virtues.  We simply cannot do the things our male ancestors did without being looked upon as a troublemaker.  Civilization promotes procreation of the species in great numbers, security, and all the other nesting attributes that favor females.  I don't think that being a constant antagonist to others in the clan was ever acceptable, because the mere fact we're still around shows that. 

    I think we males have to acknowledge our natural inclinations in order to realize our DNA coding which is something that (not yet anyway) cannot be simply reprogrammed.  But, humans are not advised to act upon every natural impulse, as I'm sure that was often frowned upon and led to trouble even in prehistoric times.  A balance between social expectations and genetic influences is what I suppose is all wrapped up in making up our true nature.

    But in this country we have been long engaged in a tug of war between the Marlboro Man and the Alan Alda personas, and that is a difficult thing.  Ultimately, it is the females who through selection determine that nature of the male.  Perhaps with the advent of civilization we simply have become more feminized through this process?

    One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).

    this is ridiculous

    July 6, 2009 - 11:47 ET by candance

    Women cause their sons to be whiny, pouty, spoiled brats. But single men who raise children, no problem there, right?

    A lot of the problems with our youth are due to single-parent or gay homes regardless of the gender involved. I absolutely agree that a child needs strong role models from both sides.

    But I object to this notion that every negative trait passed down is because of a woman's influence. According to Gary, women are the vessels of jealousy, lust, vanity, pouting, and emotional manipulating. He expressly said that women are incapable of handling politics so they should stay out of it. Then he brings up some irrelevant criticism about men to make it look fair, but conveniently never puts any limitations on what a man should do for a living.

    Then we get this jive about how women never worked until the 20th century. That's bunk. Wealthy women were not expected to, but working class women did not sit by while their children half starved. Poor women in mideval Europe did laundry, sewing, and babysitting services for wealthy clients. Who do you think were all the servants milling around a royal manor? They were not just a bunch of orphans and widows. In the frontier days of America, men and women had to work as a team to grow a harvest and keep up a cabin. Men could not do it alone and most could not afford to hire farmhands. Their wife would not be sitting in the kitchen all day while they struggled to get it all done. Then during the industrial revolution, women filled the factories in New England because they could quickly adapt to the unskilled labor.

    Life is not one big episode of Leave it to Beaver.

     

    Candance I'm so with you on

    July 6, 2009 - 12:00 ET by Radical1979

    Candance I'm so with you on Gary's attitude.  Women who "stayed home" have worked pretty damn hard, especially before the idustriral era.  Laundry, cooking, tending the animals, all required hard physical labor.  My grandmother took care of the garden while my grandfather was at "work".  She hauled water, planted, weeded, gathered, and prepared the food from the garden.  The reason women didn't work outside the home was because they were to freakin' busy working at home.

    I'm not trying to put women above men, but let's not put men above women either.

    Radical & can

    July 6, 2009 - 13:04 ET by Blonde

    I agree with you both, which is why I reacted so strongly to this forum post at the top of the thread. 

    Men and women are obviously as different as night and day, and we rightfully celebrate those differences.  To use the media's fascination with the train wreck of MJ's life and death, and blame it on the "feminization of our society" is patently absurd. 

    I hope he fails, too.

     

     

    Does anyone know what

    July 9, 2009 - 08:16 ET by garyganu

    Does anyone know what happened to that other forum about Sarah Palin that turned into a discussion on the the feminizing of our society? I can't find it.

    I base my views on reason, personal experience and common sense  http://garyganu.blogspot.com

    ~Sorry

    July 9, 2009 - 08:59 ET by choselife3x

    I don't. But I've been meaning to weigh in on your theory, so here goes.

    I believe that the problems in our society today that you attribute to feminization are in fact due to pure human selfishness. All of us are born supremely self-absorbed, concerned only with gratifying our most immediate desires/needs. (Witness babies) As we grow, we become aware that there are indeed other people in the universe and they have desires, needs, and wills of their own.  Growing up, mentally and emotionally as well as physically, is about learning to set aside your own selfish desires when they are harmful to oneself or others. A truly mature person is able to set their own selfishness aside not just to avoid harm, but purely for the good of someone else.

    I believe that a significant percentage of the last couple of generations never grew up in this way.  One who lives only for the gratification of his/her own desires is incapable of maintaining a stable, healthy relationship/society. Needless to say, pairing two such people together is a recipe for divorce. 

    I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY OUR CULTURE PLACES SUCH A HIGH VALUE ON SINGING AND DANCING.

    It isn't the singing and dancing, it's being amused, diverted, entertained. Babies/young children don't want to be instructed, they want to be entertained. Immaturity/selfishness craves gratification, instant, if possible. They cannot deny themselves for the sake of others, they are incapable of comprehending the idea.

    The qualities you cite as being feminine in source, are actually those of immaturity and selfishness. The irony is, a mature woman is capable of the greatest selflessness, in bearing and caring for her children, and being willing to give her life for them if necessary.

     

    That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel. 

    choselife3x

    July 9, 2009 - 20:48 ET by garyganu

    I can not find fault with your comment. It makes perfect sense. I will reevaluate my my views. No doubt some of what I attribute to the feminization of society, is downright immaturity.

    Perhaps Michael Jackson is the quintessential example of immaturity. By his own words he is a child who has never grown up. Apparently, many of his fans and those in the media also suffer from chronic immaturity.

    thanks chooselife3x

       Gary

     

    I base my views on reason, personal experience and common sense  http://garyganu.blogspot.com

    Well, I see you dodging

    July 9, 2009 - 21:12 ET by Blonde

    My refutation of your MCP thesis....nice.

    Crickets chirp.

     

    I hope he fails, too.

     

     

    aint it great, Blonde?

    July 9, 2009 - 23:38 ET by candance

    None of the rest of us could get our point across, but since she put it that way....

     

    I found chooselife3x's argument

    July 10, 2009 - 11:21 ET by garyganu

    I found chooselife3x's argument to be objective, reasonable and it offered a viable alternative. It made sense to me. On the other hand, some of the other opponents of my position were emotional, personal and immature. In other words, they were behaving like children. Their main focus was on discrediting me and my opinions with personal attacks and emotional arguments.

    In past discussions, I have found that it is impossible tho engage in a reasonable discussion with someone who is driven by emotion.

    I am surprised to find this behavior on a conservative website because I believe that liberals are more apt to operate on emotion and less on reason. It is now clear to me that bad behavior can be found on both sides. However, I still think that emotional behavior is more prevalent on the left.

    Here is a link to a great WWII video cartoon called "Reason and Emotion":   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvp3zAPraF4

    I base my views on reason, personal experience and common sense  http://garyganu.blogspot.com

    oh, you're right gary

    July 10, 2009 - 15:57 ET by candance

    A litany of historical facts that debunked your premise, yeah that was some real emotional theatrics. Others made the exact same point as chose - that liberalism is the cause instead of women - but they were ignored.

    You, sir, are a jerk. And that is my logical opinion.

     

    Yeah can....

    July 10, 2009 - 19:10 ET by Blonde

    Those pesky emotional facts and links do it every, single,  time.

    I truly liked the moaning about how "bossy" I was...but when I countered....it gets termed "emotional".

    Sheesh.

     

    I hope he fails, too.

     

     

    ~If I had glasses

    July 9, 2009 - 21:31 ET by choselife3x

    I'd look over them at you, shake my cooking spoon and flick you with my apron. 

    Now go take your wife out for a nice dinner. And a movie. Chick flick, preferably. ;-)

     

    That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel. 

    I can't find

    July 9, 2009 - 21:32 ET by Free Stinker

    I can't find it. 

    Good.  One less thread you can hijack.

     

    Still trying to promote your blog by coming here and acting foolish?

     

    Silliness again

    July 9, 2009 - 15:04 ET by Unsane

    I could not disagree more with this.  No, I don't dance, and on the few occasions when I have attempted to, I have found I have two left feet.

    But anyone who knows me knows the high value I place upon the abilities of human beings to manipulate sound.  In fact, the manipulation, organizing and ordering of sound - otherwise known as music - is pretty damned important for civilizations the world over.  Extremely rare is the society or civilization that does not dedicate a good portion of its resources to it. 

    I for one can appreciate the qualities of a good vocalist, as can be found here, here, here, or here.  Notice that two are male and two are female.  Does this make me a femme?  I doubt it.  The appreciation of music makes me...well, quite normal, especially reflecting upon some millenia of human history. 

    Once again, this notion of "feminization" and this implication that everything under the "feminized" banner is negative is total crap.   

    "CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)