Yet another reason why I won’t ever be buying The Mail was provided by columnist, Liz Jones with an ill-considered, sexist and hateful piece of writing entitled “The Modern Male he’s softer than a slug with a beer belly.”
Cut and paste and read for yourself - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1221088/LIZ-JONES-The-modern-male-s-softer-slug-beer-belly.html
I can just imagine her glee when she came across a review of a book by Australian anthropologist, Peter McAllister called Manthropology. The central argument of this book is that following the measurement of a set of fossilised footprints the author's view is that the modern version of Homo Sapiens is in the sorriest state he has ever been in. This if course gave Ms Jones the excuse she was looking for to indulge in a spot of man-bashing.
She clearly (and conveniently) ignored the part of the book that talked about the change in roles over the millennia which means that men no longer need to go chasing deer with a spear and are therefore no longer required to run faster than Usain Bolt. She has also conveniently ignored the fact that society in general has gotten fatter and lazier in her rush to have a go at blokes.
Full of petty generalisations her article complains about modern man’s inability to change a light bulb or make love to a woman. “Honestly,’ she complains, ‘the number of times I’ve wanted to exclaim when prone, put your back into it, man.” My advice: try some endearments, pet - it might make your man feel less like he’s humping the fridge.
She finishes her rant by saying “What sad poor creatures modern men are. What wimps. What wastes of space.”
Let’s try a wee experiment. Replace the word “men” in that first sentence with “women”, “Blacks”, “Asians”. What do you think the response might have been? Why is it deemed OK to have a go at one section of society in that manner? Would the article ever have gotten past the legal department?
As a wee side issue it is interesting to note that when Jan Moir published her piece of tripe about Stephen Gately the shitstorm on Twitter and Facebook was well-represented by men regardless of their sexual preference. For Liz Jones’ slice of bigotry the response has been muted by comparison. It seems men are happier to defend their gay brothers than they are to defend themselves. (Liz generously exempted gay men from her diatribe.) As they say in the US, go figure.
For what it’s worth, Liz I get it, you’ve been let down by men in the past. No-one envies you a philandering partner, but it’s time to be a big girl, wipe off the snot and get on with your life. I assure you it will be a whole lot easier if you are not full of bile for half of society.
What garbage! It's insulting to intelligent women as well as to men. Between this article and the one you commented on yesterday it looks to me like the editor should be taking a more controlling hand in what gets published in the Daily Mail. Both columns are outrageous trash! Unfortunately, however, when such writing induces increased public response the newspapers see that as a positive thing. Only when advertisers withdraw their financial support is there much impact so I'm glad to see that happened yesterday. Hopefully readers who also reject such articles will advise the newspaper that their readership is also being withdrawn.
ReplyDeleteExactly, careann. you make some excelelnt points as usual.
ReplyDeleteLuckily no one takes anything Liz Jones writes seriously--she's a laughingstock. When the Mail allows readers to leave comments on her articles almost every single comment is along the lines of "What offensive, ignorant drivel!" I wholehearted disagree with what she wrote (hey, I'm a woman who actually KNOWS AND LIKES A LOT OF MEN). Delightful fact about Liz Jones: she has slept with something like four men in her life, and didn't have sex till she was in her 30s because--here's a surprise--men weren't interested in such a whiny narcissist. Once she slept with a man she assumed that he was her boyfriend . . . which wasn't an opinion the men shared. (Mercy fucks, perhaps?) She married a man who cheated on her relentlessly as she threw money at him, and when she finally divorced him he published his novel about a shrill narcissistic woman. Funny that. She admits all this in print, is the weird thing--admits that by this time none of her "friends" return her calls, and that she's not going to win the Favorite Relative We All Love contest either, since she's told things about relatives that they'd prefer NOT to have splashed on a national paper. She's despicable, but she must get hits--they keep publishing her crap, much of which has to do with her cats and her dogs (one kills sheep; the other has never been trained to pee outside). They have names like Snoopy and Squeaky, and she actually seems to believe that they understand when she needs comfort and love and tells them all her problems. Hey, we have friends and loved ones. She has no idea why she doesn't. I think we beat her in the big game of life . . .
ReplyDeletewell, some do get bitter when, after settling for a slug, you then get dumped by the slug. but on the whole, men fare better than women when it comes to fading looks and flaccidity. Coco Chanel once said "better a fat, ugly man than no man at all." so, one women's trash is the women's treasure. but let us imagine a world without men...no porn, no crime and lots of happy, fat women...
ReplyDeleteI agree with Careann. It is obnoxious trash! Pure prejudice on gender. I'm sure she doesn't stop there.
ReplyDeleteShe reminds me someone I despise here in the states, Ann Coulter.
You should send this to her editor.
I'm thinking of a phrase about reaping and sowing, because getting out of something what you put in wasn't appropriate! She's less impressive than your blog thats for sure, just stumbled on it, and I like it!!!
ReplyDeleteGood to see you, Scott. Be sure to come back, then it feels less like I'm talking to myself.
ReplyDelete