Author Woggle Posted September 22, 2009 Author Posted September 22, 2009 Sounds like some great advice that certain people should follow. I'm trying. At least I can admit I have a problem.
Taramere Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 I see it appears in the "Fashion & Style" section. Is that the central theme the NYT are attempting to explore here? "Give your men to goodwill, ladies - because guys are this winter's must-have accessory..." ? Cue some of the usual names that we've been trained to accept as "iconic". Then she follows up all the pop culture references with an anecdote about the time she was molested in a school playground, complains about her father's response - and then reveals her full vacuousness by indicating that this entire article is basically a message to her father. She rejects his brand of maleness, and although she's vaguely sorry that he died before he got to enjoy his new boat with his new wife, she doesn't really give much of a crap. Wow. We should bow in the presence of such cool and nihilistic greatness. My father was a man, not a guy. But he favored bright red shirts. With black ties. And black sunglasses. I figured him for a gangster when I was small. I can’t imagine him as a boy, but someone in the family must still have that ancient portrait of him as a baby all frilled up like a tiny queen. I never once saw him cry. Enough. It's quite evident what this article is. "Dear, departed Dad. I've trivialised the memory of you in a "men versus guys" piece in the Fashion and Style section of the NYT. You're so last season." What a thoroughly ghastly woman.
C-i-C-u Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 Looks like the sexes differ on this one. Guys don't get the article and women do, it must be women talk, most guys don't get that.
alphamale Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 Thoughts on this article? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/fashion/20love.html this is stupid it makes no sense at all. is it from cosmo or vogue?
Thaddeus Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 Hey, it's written by a feminist poet living and working in a secure ivory tower. What did you expect?
Jersey Shortie Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 That article was a hot mess. I couldn't even read it all. While I am a big fan of seperating "guys" from "men", her idea on what makes a man is a bunch of bullhonkey. I wonder if she knows that Rock Hudson, while extremely masculine, was also extremely gay. Not that that makes a man any less a man but in the context of her article, it was a weird example. By the way Clint Eastwood..now there is a man.
Pyro Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 I'm trying. At least I can admit I have a problem. I am shocked and pleased to hear that.
Sam Spade Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 Enough. It's quite evident what this article is. "Dear, departed Dad. I've trivialised the memory of you in a "men versus guys" piece in the Fashion and Style section of the NYT. You're so last season." What a thoroughly ghastly woman. Haha, I am surprised she didn't become a pornstar instead. *That* would show him!
BUENG1 Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 Hey, it's written by a feminist poet living and working in a secure ivory tower. What did you expect? When I saw it was written by a professor in RI thats when I knew it would be bad.
Recommended Posts