Discussion for article #234211
I still have that album.
2 Likes
Watch Neil Labute’s “In The Company Of Men” – most of the men are jerks, but of the two main male characters, one is a complete self-centered jerk, and the other is a nice guy but a hapless inept pushover. For me, as a male, it’s hard for me to relate to either one, but if I were a woman forced to choose between them I would probably choose the jerk, which is weird because he’s so despicable and evil, but at least he’s self-assured and in control, and you’re a lot more curious to know what makes him tick (as opposed to the pushover who we hear on the phone with his mother, pretending it’s a sales call.)
Writing about sex doesn’t make one sexist.
5 Likes
Translation: I have a preference for emotional and sexual mistreatment but feel the need to rationalize it as an intellectual superiority-based conceit!
Ugh, what a dated sentiment this article espouses. Anyone still running the basic “bad boy” game is either A) genuinely a bad person who will cause you a net loss of happiness over time no matter how OMG TOTALLY HOT it seems to start off with, or B) just fucking lazy.
You can be reliable and not emotionally abusive and still fuck nasty, the mutual exclusivity of those things is a ridiculous urban legend akin to “gang highbeam initiation” or “Coca-Cola is an effective contraceptive.” Weed articles still barely justifying “The Slice’s” continued existence IMO!
3 Likes
Didion is right: “for fiction is in most ways hostile to ideology.”"
Amen. This is absolutely the case. Art, music, literature … past attempts to make them ideologically correct have resulted in extremely bad art. See: Soviet Realism. It’s far better to let art and literature reflect the times we live in, and people’s foibles and flaws, rather than make some idealized – false – version of people and the world.
What would be left of great literature if they were required to be humane, honest, decent … No Macbeth, no Dostoyevsky, etc.etc. that’s for sure. And consider, for example, even Dostoyesvsky, a devout Christian, was fascinated most by his murderous, depraved and often godless protagonists. His saintly characters were his least compelling.
3 Likes
Okay. I prefer women who are intelligent yet a bit off.
1 Like
How very sad; here is a woman who apparently won’t give the time of day to a man who actually lives out the values she claims are important to her (she is a self-described feminist, and feminism is nothing more or less than the desire for equality between men and women) but would rather “continue having a conversation with” men who are utterly self-centered and who think of women as only and always sexual objects. She even has a disparaging term for men who treat her as a fully-fledged human being: Tøffelhelts, which I gather means “henpecked.”
Am I missing something here? In what sense is this a feminist case for anything at all? It sounds more to me as though this person is quite unhappy with the effect feminism has on men, and would prefer to go back to the good old days when men were always and only pigs.
2 Likes
No Spanky, you ain’t missing nothin’. Maybe the part about turning 30 (as Nelson the inevitable pig would say, HA HA) or realizing she has to “settle”. NOOOO! I’m thinking she’s just pissed and hates her choices: find and marry a schlub and live through her kids or get a one bedroom condo … and a cat. Sorry babe but Don Draper’s like way too busy.
I must have missed something myself. Always thought Roth was a bore. 50 pages was all I could ever get through.
1 Like
Not sure we should be celebrating the demise of the bad boy just yet.
I think this is why they call it “fiction.”
Meh.