Project Wonderful Banner

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

That damned reading

What's Mallard raving about today?

Diana Gabaldon, Women.

If you spend as much time in front of the TV as Mallard does, you pretty much forfeit the right to make fun of anyone for reading anything, since your only reading material is the ESPN Bottom Line.

Anything.

12 comments:

Michael said...

Interesting how Chantel wears glasses and has a PhD in Mallard's BDSM fantasies.

exanonymous said...

Yeah, it sure is funny how people make fun of other people (probably with rude remarks) and those other people get defensive.

It's called being passive aggressive. Deliberately pushing buttons to get a response. It isn't the fault of the victim because the person doing it has the option to not open their mouth.

I get touchy regardless of the content recreational or otherwise, if someone takes it upon themselves to mock my reading, especially if I'm attempting to read it at the time.

Skenchre said...

Women be different from men!

Oh you women and your silly emotions.

Seriously, one of the worst aspects of being male is having other males making stupid remarks about women and then expecting me to agree, and when I don't agree they assume I'm gay (which I'm not).

NLC said...

See, here's the problem with even talking about many of the "jokes" that Tinsley/MF makes. I was trying to figure out some way to make the simple, obvious point that I know lots of women who read (a lot) and virtually none of them 1] read (recreationaly or otherwise) "historical fiction" and 2] among the drivel that Tinsley/MF and his il spew out that the least offensive has to do with what he calls such things.

But it's actually hard to do so without sounding like I'm putting down such reading (which I'm not --folks are entitled to like what they want) on the one hand, or patronizing on the other.

In short, it's often difficult to simply engage Tinsley/MF without soiling oneself.

So let's try another tack:

OK, Tinsley/MF, I guess you're saying that folks shouldn't be sensitive about what they call the material they read or enjoy and --for sake of accuracy-- they should avoid such evasions and simply call a spade a spade.

OK, fair enough. So, in the future would please be so kind as to refer to the strip as lunatic-fringe, sophomoric, puerile cr*p and skip the euphemism "conservative"?

dlauthor said...

Tinshley's bookshelves are, of course, reserved for half-read, beer-stained Tom Clancy novels and the Left Behind series with the pages stuck together.

rewinn said...

"...refer to the strip as lunatic-fringe, sophomoric, puerile cr*p and skip the euphemism "conservative"?..."

NLC - can you imagine Eisenhower or Goldwater making "women are stupid" the centerpiece of their philosophy?

Modern "conservatives" are the ones they warned us about, and this includes Tinkley.

rewinn said...

Michael - Now that you point out the BDSM angle, it is revealing how Strict-Teacher Chantel disciplines Mallard for being a Bad Duck!

Tinkley gave us another Unintentional Self-Revelation today.

NLC said...

rewinn

I think you're absolutely right.

To my mind, one of the greatest sins of the Tinsley/Limbaugh/Rove/Hannity/etc brigade is the way in which they have bastardized and hijacked terms like "conservative" (or, for that matter "patriotism").

In discussions on these points I typically try to be careful to use a more accurate term like "neocon" precisely to exclude genuine "conservatives" or "Republicans".

I have lots of good friends who are both (conservative and/or Republican). But they are decent, intelligent folk who have very little, if anything, in common with the Tinsley/MF's of this world. And are --rightly-- offended when anyone attributes this sort of gibberish to them.

Consequently, I feel it's up to me, when criticizing stuff like Tinsley/MF, to make this distinction clear.

(That said, I wish that they, people like my conservative/Republican friends, would, in turn, exert a little more effort to emphasize the distinction, on their part.)

Factinista said...

After reading this, it amazes me that, despite his "women are overemotional" tirades, Tinsley is actually married. How did that work out?

exanonymous said...

Heh, I don't think some men even realize they are victims of the "women are overemotional" thing. They must either internalize or face ridicule by their peers due to the pressure from society. Internalizing can lead to physical health problems.

Women risk being labeled as icey if they internalize, and not being taken seriously if they show emotion, but being allowed more freedom makes it easier for women to practice recognizing emotional cues, giving advantages in situations where hostility and danger is subtle.

Not true for everyone though. I know intuitive guys and gullible girls.

But about the strip: I don't get touchy when caught reading historical fiction bodice rippers. "Romeo and Juliet" was required reading, and I believe it's place as a classic was defined by men. And incidentally it was written by a man.

Jazzbumpa said...

Blallard consistently manages to be both mean-spirited and stupid. Wow.

WV: Vasing - as in what one should be doing to a potted plant (if you'll tolerate the gratuitous verberization,) like Blallard

Neo Tuxedo said...

it amazes me that... Tinsley is actually married. How did that work out?

I remain convinced that he only married Arlette because True Father demanded it, and that he stays married to her because he doesn't want to pollute his whole lineage forever.

(torsw: what the Fleshreaper would collect if it were a Democrat.)