Obligatory, Nigella pic! :-)
Ivan can you ping your people for me? Thanks! :-)
Posted on 07/11/2004 2:59:32 AM PDT by Happygal
It's going through the motions of embracing the gender revolution. But the fact that women's lib was/is led by a centralised militant group of shrill feminists, becomes more pronounced every day. The more belligerent the feministas get, the more resolute the grassroots become about moving in the opposite direction.
Unconsciously, women seek to be overwhelmed by men. To surrender power for love is feminine. When men do it, women lose respect. What else can explain the 82 per cent avalanche of women who answered "Yes, we do prefer men who treat us badly" in the Observer's recent survey on men?
What's more, 79 per cent of men surveyed know this.
It is this data that makes modern feminism irrelevant hyperbole. It is the way of the world and no PC whitewash or posturing pseudo-lesbo is going to change it.
It's as unbreakable as the middle-classes' revulsion to socialism's high taxes.
The whole "because we're worth it" conceit is a baggy Sex and the City mantra. It's the chant women wryly use to keep the feministas at bay and the sexual revolution chroniclers busy. But behind closed doors, beneath all the vibrating "independent woman" bravado, in the deepest recession of our minds, women still subscribe to the old model of female submission to a domineering male.
Equality in the workplace and the accompanying perks are great but, Helene Deutsch in her seminal The Psychology of Women (1948) was right in arguing that women are - and want to remain - "masochistic-narcissistic" personalities. Women want to be put to use as wives and mothers and loved for their sacrifice. They want to be needed. Self-sacrifice is how women show love.
Women, like Bill Clinton, lead "parallel lives" of boardroom dominance and bedroom enslavement. As Fay Weldon commented in the London Times this week, "'Equality' satisfies the human urge for justice but it is not a recipe for domestic happiness."
Sometimes, despite our worst competitive instincts, women should stand back and applaud Nigella Lawson. Not only does she despise the charade of pseudo-sex massages, but she also succeeds in appearing to defer to men while not having her own identity eroded.
In last weekend's Daily Telegraph Lawson commented on massage: "Nothing that's meant to be relaxing - like being told to relax - ever is." Massage is not just a substitute for sex, it is for women who don't "do" sex.
My first (and last) massage performed by a robust Helga type with a commanding mumble resulted in me leaving the clinic dazed and sexually confused, wondering whether I was a lesbian. Massage is for sexual androids. I defy anyone - who isn't an asexual twig - not to get frisky as foreign fingertips knead at your fleece.
Lawson agrees with Judith Newman, author of You Make Me Feel Like an Unnatural Woman, who said: "Why would you want to be touched by a stranger you weren't having sex with?" In our sophisticated swirling metropolis, sex has become too messy and time-consuming for many women.
Lawson's genius is in emphasising that she's not one of these new women and it is why men really love her. Looks and cooks are a dime a dozen. She lives by the simple and enduring "Bring beer, come naked" formula.
Last Saturday, Lawson coyly confessed that she isn't "a decision-maker", expanding that the TV remote is never in her hand but, "I'm not complaining: the good thing about not being in control is that you have no responsibility; you are just a passive receiver for whatever is thrown at you."
Now we know why art collector, Charles Saatchi could afford to be so phlegmatic about the BritArt blaze.
Lawson gives the impression that she's a carnal creature driven solely by her senses. A lustrous panda roaming through the undergrowth for various genus of bamboo cane. Her career a trivial distraction to her primary pursuits. Lawson's "obsession with food" is really and truly an obsession with sex.
It's all just an act of course, but the point is that Lawson is willing to play the subordinate role, real or imagined. The ideal balance between doormat and dominatrix. And most women secretly agree.
Women still want sex and security and men still want sex and flattery. The spurious "masculinity in crisis" debate has been drummed up by academics who have realised they've come to the gender revolution cul de sac.
I'd be bored too if the only principal changes over the centuries between men and women were to be observed in the clinical office environment.
Obligatory, Nigella pic! :-)
Ivan can you ping your people for me? Thanks! :-)
I was wondering when you folks across the Atlantic were finally going to post some pictures of hot chicks.
It's about bloody time, if you ask me.
so who cares?
A lie from the pit of hell.
Even the freakin' Stars and Stripes, the newspaper for military personnel deployed overseas has taken a decidedly left turn of late.
People are writing to the Letters section about it in droves.
Stars and Stripes is government owned isn't it? Just like NPR, PBS, Voice of America et al etc, it will become leftist.
You know very well that: "men don't trifle with girls who carry rifles."
Even if you are: "quick on the trigger."
I assume "badly" means battering and demeaning a woman. Or even treating her as a second-class citizen. Surely women don't want that! Neither would I want to treat a woman that way even if she did. That's not being manly at all.
Oh, it already has. I'm getting ready to join the clamor in the Letters section. They publish deployed civilians' letters too as long as we're working for the military. Today's paper had two articles that just hacked me off and this is happening daily now. And they seem to be rather pro-Kerry.
Well, I certainly wouldn't want to be with a bloke who raised a hand to me, or treated me as less than an equal.
However, I have so many girlfriends who always fall for 'the wrong type of guy'. They love 'b*stards'. I don't know why they do it, but it's like a pattern they fall into - if a guy treats them mean, the more interested they are.
I agree that the notion that women like to be treated badly is probably at the root of huge numbers of rapes and other assaults as well as millions of unhappy marrriages. No one wants to be treated badly
"'Equality' satisfies the human urge for justice but it is not a recipe for domestic happiness."
Not a recipe for accomplishing much of anything except the recognition that we are created equal under God. But He also gave us different abilities.
Try to get a job done with two bosses with different ideas. Been there, done that.
Ping!
and finally,
Case closed.
Speak for yourself, pal!
My bad.
I think they're more Scourge's type.
I've found out though life that women who love food love sex.
Someone buy Ann a pizza!
Mr. Atomic Vomit
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.