“The Pussification of the Western Male” — Yer all a Bunch of Wimmins!
By Mona
.
Kim du Toit’s essay by that title has to be read to be believed, but historical context for it — and a great dissection — are at LGM. Some of du Toit’s genius on display:
We have become a nation of women..[...].I’m sorry, but the premise of [the Queer Eye for the Straight Guy] show nauseates me. A bunch of homosexuals trying to “improve†ordinary men into something “better†(ie. more acceptable to women): changing the guy’s clothes, his home decor, his music—for fuck’s sake, what kind of girly-man would allow these simpering butt-bandits to change his life around?.Yes, the men are, by and large, slobs. Big fucking deal. Last time I looked, that’s normal. Men are slobs, and that only changes when women try to civilize them by marriage. That’s the natural order of things.
I’m betting Mr. du Toit is a closet case.
Comment by Badtux —
November 2, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
Of course not! Like Larry (tap tap tap) Craig (swipe swipe swipe), he’s 100% heterosexual! Why, I bet his wife even says so!
Comment by Eric Martin —
November 2, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
Wetsuits anyone?
Comment by Mona —
November 2, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Eric, don’t omit the essential accoutrement. The device one MUST have for appropriate insertion before donning said wetsuits.
Comment by Gary Farber —
November 2, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
“…but historical context for it — and a great dissection — are at LGM….”
Whippersnapper.
Just remember to respect your blogging elders, who were around for the Jurassic blogging era of Our History. Fetch my walker now, please! And speak up! [holds ear trumpet up to ear]
(Next up: A review of Steven den Beste’s greatest hits.)
Comment by sglover —
November 2, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
I dunno why a guy named Kim would be so touchy about gender identification….
My semi-plausible Grand Unified Theory of Right-Wing Mental Illness holds that it’s all in the names. Guys like Newt Gingrich, Lester Maddox, Lindsey Graham, Trent Lott, Grover Norquist must’ve got more than their share of “attention” on the elementary school playground.
Comment by Mona —
November 2, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
Yanno, I came very near to making that same point in my post, and then thought better of it. Does that make me a better, er, uh, man than you, or you more of a wimmins than me?
Comment by CaseyL —
November 2, 2007 @ 8:29 pm
Hey, if the “Kim” didn’t do it, the “du Toit” definitely did.
My personal theory is that these are the people who used to be found walking along muttering to themselves, and who sent anonymous letters written in crayon on brown paper to all of their imaginary enemies.
Deinstitutionalization has a lot to answer for
Comment by Scott —
November 2, 2007 @ 8:30 pm
If I watch “queer eye” while cleaning my guns, does it cancel out?
Comment by Mona —
November 2, 2007 @ 8:50 pm
Well I certainly hope that or something does. Else we straight girls are up sh1t’s creek, with every “man” around us going light in the loafers due to this wretched pussification epidemic. Why, we shall all be going unserviced!
Comment by pogge —
November 2, 2007 @ 9:05 pm
When I think of du Toit, I think of Philosoraptor who wrote a rebuttal at the time.
The duToitification of the Western Conservative.
Comment by Mona —
November 2, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
pogge: that is a great smackdown and I encourage everyone to read it. My only disagreement really is that the term “pussy” offends me no more or less than do “dick” or “prick,” which is to say, not at all.
Comment by Derek Copold —
November 2, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
I have a problem with the Queer Eye as well, but for far different reasons. It tends to emphasize the growing belief that the only neatly dressed men are gays. This trend has fed into the growing slovenliness we see these days, I believe. The messier you are, the more it’s a message of your heterosexuality. QEFTSG isn’t really the cause of this, to be sure, but more like a symptom.
OTOH, his take on the Cheerio ad with the Aunt Ruth line was worth a laugh. It would have made for a good Family Guy sketch.
Comment by Karen —
November 2, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
Oh, I am so happy you posted on this, and at a time I can comment!!!
It took me two times through that horror to finally believe that it wasn’t a parody. From the drag queen name (Pr. Kim du Toy, I believe)to the quote from John Belushi as Blutarski, this read like the first lame effort at satire from a talented but unschooled teenager. Not much of a start, but the Blutarski bit shows promise, kid.
But no, in fact, Monsieur du Toit apparently really means it. He really does think that somehow being clean and orderly is unmanly, and even becoming clean and orderly out of consideration for one’s wife is unmanly. I can only be glad he apparently never has a date, so there’s no longsuffering Mde. du Toit out there having to endure his rants and body odor.
Comment by Karen —
November 2, 2007 @ 9:43 pm
I really do want to know whether he knows that Germany didn’t actually bomb Pearl Harbor? Books and history being all faggy ‘n stuff, y’know.
Comment by Mona —
November 2, 2007 @ 9:53 pm
Yes, which is absurd in the case of my one, exceedingly heterosexual son who is a prisstard with his clothing and irons his (very nice) shirts with…”womanly” perfection.
And he cannot abide a mess. He has OCD where dishes or anything lying around are concerned. But hey, he does chug brew with da guys during football games, so there may be hope for him. In any event, his sex-pot wife seems sure he isn’t gay.
Comment by Mona —
November 2, 2007 @ 10:04 pm
He’d be horrified at the Marine Officers Corps suggested reading list. It even has novels!
Comment by Eric Martin —
November 2, 2007 @ 10:05 pm
Hey, if the “Kim†didn’t do it, the “du Toit†definitely did.
Ha!
If I watch “queer eye†while cleaning my guns, does it cancel out?
Well, that all depends on whether or not there’s a metaphor involved…
Comment by DonBoy —
November 2, 2007 @ 10:27 pm
I can only be glad he apparently never has a date, so there’s no longsuffering Mde. du Toit out there having to endure his rants and body odor.
Bad news.
Comment by Barry —
November 2, 2007 @ 10:37 pm
Comment by Scott —
“If I watch “queer eye†while cleaning my guns, does it cancel out?”
Only if you keep your eyes on the wimmin. And, of course, only if you’re cleaning your *own* guns. Ya cleanin’ somebody else’s guns, you be outta da het pool, I’se afeerd.
Comment by bryan —
November 3, 2007 @ 3:20 am
“.. absurd in the case of my one, exceedingly heterosexual son who is a prisstard with his clothing and irons his (very nice) shirts with…â€womanly†perfection”
The growing italianification of the western male is a real problem.
Comment by KCinDC —
November 3, 2007 @ 8:00 am
Italian men iron their own shirts?
Comment by Karen —
November 3, 2007 @ 8:11 am
DonBoy, apparently his wife repairs his computer for him. That explains a lot.
Comment by bryan —
November 3, 2007 @ 12:47 pm
“Italian men iron their own shirts?”
hmm that’s true they don’t, but they do insist on having them ironed. The boy is halfway there.
Comment by Neel Krishnaswami —
November 3, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
Scott wrote, “If I watch “queer eye†while cleaning my guns, does it cancel out?”
No, you might just be a Pink Pistol. (As an aside: the mere existence of this group makes me very happy, just as a reminder the world is full of things I couldn’t possibly have made up.)
Comment by lawrence krubner —
November 4, 2007 @ 11:56 am
People have accussed du Toit of misogyny. It’s important to realize that he’s actually promoting a broader brand of hatred: misanthropy. He has a contempt for men that matches his contempt for women.
du Toit writes “Never mind that it’s simplistic— we like simple, we are simple, we are men—our lives are uncomplicated”.
Du Toit seems unwilling to praise the accomplishments of Leonardo Da Vinci, Issac Newtown or Mikhail Baryshnikov. These men are not simple, their accomplishments are not simple. An actual love of humanity demands a love for those advances that set humanity apart from the other animals that walk this earth. These include achievements made in the arts, the sciences, in war, politics, and industry.
Of these, du Toit only seems willing to praise accomplishments made in war, though even this he undercuts by listing a bunch of actors as heroes and by comparing his personal courage (standing up to a Cheerios commercial?) to the sacrifices men made on Omaha Beach.
Trackback by meganmcardle.theatlantic.com —
November 5, 2007 @ 9:23 am
Can’t we keep the “closet case” thing in the closet?…
I wish people wouldn't do this : I’m betting Mr. du Toit is a closet case. I am, as you might expect…
Comment by Other Scott —
November 5, 2007 @ 2:39 pm
And you know this how, exactly?
Lame. If you were to actually understand your opposition rather than just knocking over strawmen all day, you might learn something and gain some credibility in the process.
Comment by Lawrence Krubner —
November 5, 2007 @ 3:36 pm
“And you know this how, exactly?”
From the sentence of his that I quoted.
Comment by Other Scott —
November 5, 2007 @ 4:42 pm
One out-of-context sentence, massive extrapolation, and you’ve got him pegged as a culture-hating misanthrope?
Come on.
Comment by Lawrence Krubner —
November 7, 2007 @ 4:33 pm
“One out-of-context sentence, massive extrapolation, and you’ve got him pegged as a culture-hating misanthrope?”
I can’t tell if you’re serious or not. Are you just joking around?
In what sense is the sentence out of context? Is he not arguing that men like simple things? Simple narratives, simple stories, simple ideas?
I’m correct in saying that he lists a bunch of actors as heroes, right?
Did you read this, which was linked to above?