Some tosser in the States has created a website so that men can track women's bleeding times, and the NZ Herald chooses to celebrate it by saying it will save lives.
Since when has anyone died because women menstruate?
When about 10 women are killed every year by their intimate partners (source: New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse Fact Sheet), it is just offensive and puerile to suggest that the responsibility for deaths lies with women, because they menstruate.
But I forgot. Of course - silly me. It's always teh laydeez' fault.
81 comments:
I am speechless. What a fvcking disgrace. And what an embarassment! That the NZ Herald would run this as their editorial makes me despair.
katy
Words fail me. Who's the bigger arse here - the inventor of this marvel comparable to fire and the flush toilet (either of which would be a good way to dispose of said marvel), or the clown who chose to uncritically publish the story?
How can I/we make a complaint about this?
that is so offensive on so many damn levels.... i dont know where to start really....
Stupidity at best and obscenity at worst. The Herald's descent into irrelevancy seems to be accelerating. I suspect the answer to Anna's question is that the Hearld the most at fault. Individual judgments will always vary and include rank-idiocy, but the Herald's staffed by professionals whose jobs require them to use a critical eye in the selection of stories. They've choosen this from the millions of others, therefore asigning it broader value - had they been critical, which they could've been, then it might have been defensable but this is just purient, sexist crap.
Ye gads, I haz not the wordz.
One form of complaint would be a letter to the editor. Another would be to submit a contrary opinion piece. A third would be a complaint to the Press Council (I think, suspect others may know more about how to do this?)
We should do something together perhaps?
Yes, I'd love to do something together. I hope will also see Women's Refuge and other anti-violence organisations complain about it.
One of the things that both stuns and saddens me most is that, in it's first phase, the 'It's not OK' campaign went around the country to work with various media. They were challenging journos to identify victim-blaming assumptions in their work, and it seemed to be going well. Then, every now and again, someone takes a giant step backwards.
You'd think that a country that specialises in killing women and children during domestic disputes would have more nous than to turn it into a joke.
Since when has anyone died because women menstruate?
The Belgrano?
That's kind of obscure, Danyl. Care to elaborate?
Two things - why is it wrong for a man to want to know when his partner is menstruating? Obviously it would be better if their partners told them, but in cases where the man doesn't feel comfortable asking or the woman doesn't feel comfortable telling him, this could be useful. I'm certainly always grateful when my partner informs me.
Secondly, according to the British National Association for Premenstrual Syndrome, there is a "connection between PMS and offending behaviour". Dr Patricia Easteal has listed a series of cases where women on trial for acts of violence have used temporary insanity or automatism partly caused by PMS as a plea to have their sentences altered or reduced.
Sources: http://www.pms.org.uk/About+PMS/News/2007+bulletins/November+2007/item850/
http://209.85.175.132/search?q=cache:o7XnLuSd_84J:www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/16/Easteal2.pdf+%22temporary%2Binsanity%22+pms+murder+manslaughter&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=nz&client=firefox-a
Danyl is referring to this.
I know you rather delight in pissing people off Danyl, but your poor taste is somewhat astounding. Trying to beat the Herald at their own game or something?
Anyway, best we return to a more positive discussion of what could be done together to call the Herald out. I've got to be afk until tomorrow probably, but will try to pop back in tonight.
The General Belgrano was an Argentinian warship sunken during the Falklands war with the loss of all hands. Some people regard its sinking as a war crime as it was outside the declared exclusion zone around the Falklands and was heading back to port. Never heard any suggestion the order to sink was influenced by Margaret Thatcher's medical status, though.
I thought of another way to show your displeasure - if you are a subscriber you could cancel your subscription. According to their website info you can even do it today:
To speak to a Customer Representative, call 0800 100 888 between 6am & 6pm Monday to Friday, or 6am & 12pm Saturday and Sunday.
My mum cancelled her sub awhile ago and you had to be quite staunch to do it, and tell them why. So you might want to be prepared to tell the Customer Service Representative your reasons.
Hugh: Did you not have any problem with how the Herald treated this issue, not to mention that this wasn't some puff piece but the editorial??
As for the value of the product, it relies on information being provided by the "poor fella" in the first place so it's hardly telling you anything new. It would be a waste of time in my case anyway as my cycle is irregular; I had one partner who tried to keep up with it and failed miserably so unless the service takes my temperature each morning or monitors vaginal mucous it won't be of much use to us.
katy
Katy
The Herald's piece is certainly flippant and unhelpful, although as I've indicated the idea that PMS can cause violence does appear at least superficially to have some credibility.
However, a lot of criticism here has been aimed at the product, with its inventor called an 'arse', the implication that only a critical approach would have been valid, the idea that this is offensive on 'many levels' (i.e. presumably not just the existence of the article), and so on. That's what I'm curious about.
You are of course right that this service relies on some information being provided and that for some women it won't help. But I don't think that means he needn't have bothered in the first place, let alone that he was somehow wrong to have done so.
A counter question, Hugh, would be what purpose does this invention actually serve? Why the hell does a person need to monitor his/her partner's bodily functions? I don't ask my partner to report to me each time he goes potty. It points to a pretty strange relationship dynamic.
And if a guy is all that concerned about about his partner's menstrual cycle, could he not just ask? And what is he supposed to do with this information anyway? Is it so he knows when to be considerate for five days a month? Great.
PS. The idea that PMS makes women crazy is highly contested. In fact, it seems to me like a new version of the centuries-old pseudo-science (ie women have weaker constitutions, wandering uteri, brain hemisphere issues that prevent us from reading maps) that has been used to disqualify women from doing influential or meaningful work.
What a bunch of silly, condescending shit. To say nothing of the idea that if we take responsibility for alerting men to the intimate details of our lives, we can help them not to kill us. Fuck, that's benevolent.
What Anna said.
Why the hell does a person need to monitor his/her partner's bodily functions?
My son wasn't hard to toilet train, but then for a period of about nine months he developed a refusal to do number twos. The mini-cycle would last for about a week, and you could just measure his crankiness increasing during that period - he went from being an absolute angel to being angry and impossible and then back again as soon as the phisiological pressure - as it were - was relieved.
So here's an idea: perhaps there ought to be a site that tracks the regularity of both partners.
Anna, I don't know why a man wouldn't feel comfortable asking or a woman wouldn't feel comfortable telling him, but I'm not going to judge those who don't. As I said earlier, my girlfriend feels the need to inform me, so I guess I'll just have to live with the fact that you consider our relationship to have a strange dynamic.
Anna, I realise that the concept is controversial, which is why I tried to source quotations from women - in this case a support organisation dedicated to assisting women in dealing with PMS, and a female academic. Do you think these two sources are attempting to prevent women from doing influential or meaningful work?
For that matter, do you feel that women who have had sentences for violent crime reduced due to PMS-related automatism or temporary insanity shouldn't have recieved this consideration from the sentencing authority?
I don't have a problem with a woman telling her partner she's got her period. I have a big problem with my partner using an electronic menstruation monitor to keep tabs on me.
In the reading I've done around this issue (which admittedly, isn't heaps), crimes attributed to PMS have had more to do with other factors - ie in one case, a woman routinely beaten by her husband used this defence. I don't rule out the possibility that some women are badly affected by PMS, but I'm heartily fed up with having it used to dismiss women's concerns, or to make a joke out of us.
PS Extra points if you can tell whether I really meant that, or it's just the hormones talking.
PS Extra points if you can tell whether I really meant that, or it's just the hormones talking.
What's the smiley for sardonic laughter again?
It's unfair, though: I'd like men to start getting some sympathy for the fact that we have to deal with the brain impairing power of testosterone the whole freaking time.
So whats so offensive, If you dont like it then dont use pms, pmt or whatever to behave badly.
So whats so offensive, If you dont like it then dont use pms, pmt or whatever as an excuse to behave badly.
Anon, no one here is advocated using PMS as an excuse to behave badly. That's the whole point.
Are you a severe or high risk model Anna?
http://tinyurl.com/4yx2z
My mood is definately affected by my cycle. It brings things to a head but it dosn't create something out of nothing.
You don't want your girlfriend/partner/wife to be a bitch to you when she has pms? Be a decent man 365 days of the year. You should be doing that anyway.
"You don't want your girlfriend / partner / wife to be a bitch to you when she has pms? Be a decent man 365 days of the year. You should be doing that anyway."
That comment is as stupid as this one.
"Maybe women who get beaten or abused by thier partners shouldnt do stuff to upset them"
anyone who is abusive or violent needs to accept responsibility for thier actions, blaiming it on drink, pms, drugs or any number of excuses is saying that such behaviour is acceptable.
Time to repeat (again!) what the inimitable Melissa McEwan has to say about PMT:
Let's put this shit to bed right now: Women don't lose their minds when they have period-related irritability. It doesn't lower their ability to reason; it lowers their patience and, hence, tolerance for bullshit. If an issue comes up a lot during "that time of the month," that doesn't mean she only cares about it once a month; it means she's bothered by it all the time and lacks the capacity, once a month, to shove it down and bury it beneath six gulps of willful silence.
You can read the whole piece here: Feminism 101: Periods.
"However, a lot of criticism here has been aimed at the product, with its inventor called an 'arse', the implication that only a critical approach would have been valid, the idea that this is offensive on 'many levels' (i.e. presumably not just the existence of the article), and so on. That's what I'm curious about"
Leaving aside the issue of the NZ Press (which makes me want to cry...and not in a pre-menstrual way), indeed there may be many good reasons to share information regarding bodily functions with those you live with. As Giovanni wrote, some people's moods might be affected by their defecatory habits and it is just fab if one and one's partner decide to keep each in other in that loop. Likewise with what one had for lunch, how itchy that rash is and if one is feeling pre-premenstrual. Making a big deal out of it as in the article isn't about anything constructive, it is about creating some pseudo male solidarity based on shared derision.
katy
So Deborah, what you're saying is that anybody who finds themselves on the receiving end of a bollocking while their partner is suffering from PMS should look to their own behaviour?
no hugh, we're saying you should actually listen to what she's "bitching" about, or to put it in a better way, to what she's trying to tell you. you should take it seriously and not write it off as PMS. you should try to work through the issue as you should at any other time, rather than thinking that it's unimportant just because she's raising it at a particular time in her cycle.
ALL humans deal with hormonal fluctuation - sex hormones, stress hormones, mood hormones, pain relief hormones and many many more besides. They affect us positively, they affect us negatively, they affect us regularly and irregularly.
Just for once, I would like the mainstream media, and everyone else, to recognise these two things;
a) not only women are affected by hormones
b) if hormones can periodically make us tired and on edge, they can also affect us positively, giving us focus, energy and positivity.
Until those two basic facts are recognised, I have to agree with Anna - the obsession with PMS is just the modern way of writing off women's anger and distress as hysteria.
Hell, what's with all the mysognistic commentary? D4J here, why I wonder? Ahh, maybe that's why this article is offensive, 'cause it licenses mysognistic crap under the veil of concern. Still, I'm with Giovanni on suffering from testosterone from time to time...
Irritation is a normal part of life. It happens at home, at work, and everywhere else. You deal with it using normal social skills. PMS is no different in that regard.
My partner gets irritated when Garth McVicar is on the telly. I don't use an elaborate electronic system to predict this. I don't attribute it to some sort of mysterious biological condition that I can't be expected to understand or deal with. I don't dismiss his irritation as clearly irrational and something he'll get over. I just recognise that Garth McVicar is annoying - and even more so after a tiring day spent minding children. And then I just get over it.
Why the need to caricature women as creatures who lose their minds when we become irritated? For those women for whom PMS is a more serious problem, you could actually try talking about it, perhaps out of concern for her as much as yourself. These women probably don't enjoy it much either, after all.
Anna, I don't think there is a caricature here. You are reading way too much into this.
Questions for you:
1. Do you agree that women's behaviour changes at times in their cycle? I assume you do, Deborah certainly quotes approvingly from an article that suggests that is the case.
2. Do you think it unreasonable that someone impacted by that behaviour change might want to know in advance so they can avoid the angst, rather than remembering afterwards?
I am absolutely amazed at the things that you can read into what is, after all, a pretty simple application. Hell, I once had an application that reminded me to "randomly" buy presents. It went down pretty well with the other half - is that also offensive because I am using an application to remind me to be nice? Or is it an astute use of technology to supplement my own memory, in the same way I have a calendar entry that reminds me to go to a status meeting once a week?
Interesting that Heine hasn't stepped into this conversation, given he's had the bravery to post this comment over at Kiwiblog's discussion of the PMS alerts:
Well it certainly set off a few early this month over at the Hand Mirror :) Lighten up girls.:)
Homepaddock is less impressed.
The good old "can't you take a joke" line.
I'm sure we've hit bingo on this.
Paul, why did you use the word 'angst'? That itself is a caricature. Menstruation doesn't cause men angst. It seldom causes women angst. I'm not sure why some men feel persecuted by the fact that women menstruate.
And if you can't tell the difference between remembering to buy someone a present and monitoring their intimate bodily functions, I can't really explain it to you. All I can really do is ask you how you'd feel if your partner chartered how quickly your hair is receding, graphed how often you have erectile dysfunction issues, or monitored when you do number twos.
Sorry if this has caused you angst.
Although there is no evidence that anyone has died because women menstruate, there is evidence that more women are beaten up by their partners after sporting events. So perhaps someone could devise software to alert women whenever the All Blacks are playing.
All I can really do is ask you how you'd feel if your partner... graphed how often you have erectile dysfunction issues
This is the best idea I've heard all month. (Okay, it's only the 2nd, but it's a pretty good idea.) Let's do it. We'll call the site "I don't understand, honey, this had never happened before", or IDUHTHNHB for short. Or maybe something a little snappier.
Because taking offence will only get you so far.
I was not trying to be funny, Anna.
Leaving this thread, now.
@Giovanni, you must let us know if anything bumps IDUHTHNHB off the top of your best idea of the month list. We could give it the tag-line "saving relationships one member at a time".
Is there actually any research that shows more domestic violence after test matches? My recollection was that there was a lot of anecdotal evidence from women's refuges, but not much more than that? Frankly there isn't enough research in these areas full stop.
We could give it the tag-line "saving relationships one ***member*** at a time".
Hehehehhhh...
(Help! I'm incapacitated! Julie found one of the words that turns any man back to the mental age of twelve!)
(One of those eighteen thousand words, you know.)
Yeah, member is a funny word - and I'm not even a boy.
Unsure about evidence re the link between domestic violence and sport - as you say, Julie, it's reported by Women's Refuge, but beyond that I'm not sure.
I do know, however, that putting the responsibility for avoiding said violence on women by offering us a rugby monitoring system isn't much of an answer.
I do know, however, that putting the responsibility for avoiding said violence on women by offering us a rugby monitoring system isn't much of an answer.
You know exactly how Paul meant that - if for no other reason that he told you, and you really have no reason to doubt his good faith. I am not saying "lighten up", but I am saying "don't be wilfully obtuse".
My ex suffered from pms (or rather the kids & I suffered) however I now realised pms (with her) was an excuse to behave like a bitch, it was in her nature to be this way she was/is a bully and liked to manipulate people as if they were toys. She now blames me for turning our daughters against her(the girls now live with me full time, their choice btw).
A/holes (male or frmale)have the habit of blaming everyone else but themselves. A previous G/F from years ago also suffered from pms but she was selfaware enough to apologise for excesses in her behaviour....unfortunately shes married to some wonderful guy....but then I do have my girls!
My ex suffered from pms (or rather the kids & I suffered) however I now realised pms (with her) was an excuse to behave like a bitch, it was in her nature to be this way she was/is a bully and liked to manipulate people as if they were toys. She now blames me for turning our daughters against her(the girls now live with me full time, their choice btw).
A/holes (male or frmale)have the habit of blaming everyone else but themselves. A previous G/F from years ago also suffered from pms but she was selfaware enough to apologise for excesses in her behaviour....unfortunately shes married to some wonderful guy....but then I do have my girls!
I don't think I'm being willfully obtuse at all, Giovanni - how else could you interpret that comment, except as an ALAC-style injunction for women to change their behaviour to accommodate male violence? (Except as an attempt to provoke, which I originally thought it must be, as it was so crass.) If you're reading something I'm not, you'll need to clarify.
It was meant in much the same spirit as your "graphing erectile dysfunction" comment, which we could have also chosen to read as crass provocation, but didn't, because we could see where you were coming from. As somebody wiser than me as written in this very blog over the last few days - and I'm paraphrasing - do pause to consider at whose expense a joke is made. But more than that, I don't appreciate you not taking Paul at his word. Especially (although by noe means entirely) since he's not Joe Anonymous, but has a well documented (and easily traceable) presence in the progressive blogosphere and you owe him a little more respect than what you've just shown.
There's a point at which, I think, it's possible to distinguish crass and provocative baiting from irony/parody. I though Paul's comment was clearly the latter. However, given the vitriolic commentary here and elsewhere, perhaps it's not all that clear to everyone. I don't mean that as a 'brotherhood' comment but I am wary of friendly fire. For instanec, over at homepaddock "mens' views" is conflated with the offensive crap spouted by the idiot-regulars who populate kiwiblog (none-so-subtley encouraged by chief fire-starter Farrar).
Still confused. My comment about erectile dysfunction wasn't intended to be provocative or parodic at all.
And yet we could have so easily chosen to read it that way - you're not the only one who knows how to operate a high horse.
Backin15 is right of course, and I accept you might have found Paul's comment glib at first read. But after he explicitly said "I didn't mean it like that" you could have extended him the favour of accepting his good faith, just as we do yours.
"Paul's rugby comment might have seemed ironic to me if he hadn't just defended the PMS monitoring system he implicitly compared it to. When you've just endorsed one set of offensive misogynistic assumptions at length, you leave yourself open to misinterpretation when you put forward the next set."
Not once did I defend the PMS monitoring system. You seem to be confusing me with PaulL, who is someone else. I think you owe me an apology
Yes, Paul, I did confuse you with the other Paul and I do apologise.
Giovanni, suggesting women are responsible for avoiding being murdered is no less funny because you don't intend it as a joke.
Pity Paul's comment couldn't be construed like that except by assuming extreme callousness and bad faith on his part.
I am stunned at you telling me, as a person who has experienced sexual violence, that my reaction to a victim-blaming comment is a 'high horse' one. It is precisely because of comments like that that women in my position find it difficult to speak up. Words like 'shrill', 'hysterical' and 'irrational' - very similar to the ones used in PMS discussions - are used to dismiss what we say. I'd like to think that if our positions were reversed, I would not make as hurtful a comment to you as you have just done to me.
Nobody accused you of being anything until you insisted to take offence for a comment that was anything but. If you do not allow others the benefit of the doubt, and take them at their word when they say they don't mean what you're insisting they must mean, you're inflicting no insignificant amount of hurt yourself.
I fear we're at risk of disagreeing over a misunderstanding. It's clear there's a lot of opportunistic misogyny being aired over this story. The website is offensive enough, the story moreso and the sexism evident in various parts of the NZ blogosphere simply proves that despite significant advances, pockets of goons still exist. Still I think a number of men from around the blogosphere agree with the original item here; this is f*^ken offensive. I don't think any of the fellas commenting here are fishing for compliments, we're just as pissed off at the behaviour as Anna, Deborah and the other authors at the Handmirror are. Cheers, from yet another Paul (backin15).
I was certainly offended by the original story (FFS - talk about buying into the contemporary version of hysteria), and even more offended by the Herald's stupid subbing, and equally stupid editorial.
But I like Anna's point - that we all get irritated and upset, by all sorts of things. And normally, what we do is try to deal with the cause of the irritation, rather than just dismiss it as "that time of the month." I hate it that people dismiss my concerns and worries with, "Oh, she's on the rag." It's incredibly patronising and belittling, and so very, very dismissive.
Readers may also be interested in another male perspective at Monkey With Typewriter. To prepare you, I warn that it is illustrated with pictures such as the little girl levitating in The Exorcist...
Paul, since I got the wrong end of the stick, I'm deleting the comments I made which were critical of you. Sorry once more, and good wishes.
Backin15 - you're quite right. Thanks for being relentlessly sane and thoughtful.
Giovanni, when I said I didn't want to take this conversation further, it was because I don't find weak moralising about how women should react to violence particularly helpful. If you're looking for examples of bad faith, you might want to ask yourself why you're convinced my annoyance with Paul's comment wasn't genuine. You might even consider what it's like for someone who has experienced violence, then put two and two together. While you're at it, you might like to park your high horse in the stable next to mine.
If you're looking for examples of bad faith, you might want to ask yourself why you're convinced my annoyance with Paul's comment wasn't genuine.
I've already conceded it might have been genuine at first. But if you insist to see bad intentions after you've been told by the author of the comment that there were none, it's going to be pretty difficult to sustain a conversation with you (and carry out conversations in general) around here.
Giovanni, thanks once more for ignoring both my unwillingness to discuss this further and the explanation I've already given.
When Paul said his comment wasn't supposed to be funny, I thought he meant he was making a serious and rather misogynistic suggestion. I can't make myself much clearer than that.
I'm unsure at this point whether you're deliberately trying to be hurtful or just enjoy moralising, but either way it might be time to give it a rest.
One of the many things that bother me about this "invention" is the implication that men[1] are all emotionally incompetent and need a computer to tell them how someone feels because they are unable to figure it out themselves.
IME most men are quite capable of reading their partners' moods and adapt to them. Just as most women are able to read and adapt to their partners'.
Like most people I know I'm entirely capable of even reading friends' and colleagues' moods and I don't ever live with them.
Isn't there something pretty insulting to men in here?
P.S. What everyone else said too :)
[1] I might be wrong but I doubt the inventors of this were thinking of it for female partners to use.
Julie writes,
Is there actually any research that shows more domestic violence after test matches? My recollection was that there was a lot of anecdotal evidence from women's refuges, but not much more than that? Frankly there isn't enough research in these areas full stop.
I'm not aware of any research in NZ, but there's some from overseas. Here is a study from the UK using collated Police statistics. which includes the awesome quote
"This is not the fault of football — this is the fault of violent people taking any excuse to be abusive"
Anna,
thank you.
Paul
Backin15 - you're quite right. Thanks for being relentlessly sane and thoughtful.
Shucks. I respect the writers and writing here, it's exceptional and fosters a great environment for discussion. Congrats.
And now stuff has stupid comments too that are just pathetic.. sexy underwear is not going to make me less pms ish..... totally wtf? http://www.stuff.co.nz/4836724a28.html
Anita, I completely agree. There are two strands to it: men are supposedly emotionally obtuse, and have a somewhat childlike fixation on toys and gadgets.
I've never for a moment had trouble talking with my partner about anything to do with menstruation. He takes a sort of affirmative action pride in striding to the supermarket counter with tampons, bless his heart.
I figure that reproductive health (of both partners) is pretty fundamental to a relationship - it's hard for me to imagine how a relationship would be able to function if partners felt they couldn't discuss these matters together.
If my partner had a specifically male health problem (prostate or erectile related, for the sake of argument) I'd be horrified if he felt he couldn't talk to me about it.
One of the things that annoys me so much about this article is that, by suggesting menstruation should be monitored by a web-based application, it implies that it's something couples don't or shouldn't discuss candidly.
Anna,
What do they expect these gadget obsessed motional obtuse men to do when they find out from the big computer in the sky that their partner is premenstrual? Buy them a doohickey?
One of the things I find frustrating about how the MSM talks about PMS is that it tells men it's one size fits all.
I once told a co-worker who is a single father that for me premenstrual means weepy (and weepy about being weepy) not grumpy and he was utterly amazed. The next day told me he'd talked to his daughter about it and they were both really relieved that they now knew what was going on with her. He said that he'd been looking out for grumpy cos that's what her mother had been and it's what the telly shows.
It all seems to be setting up good hearted men to fail in every possible way.
I totally agree about being open about these things with the people close to us, which means we need good models for how to be open and clear about it.
argh i saw this i was gobsmacked, how absurd! i hate the 'don't worry about her, she's hormonal' culture. i don't think guys would be too happy if it got turned around to be 'don't worry about him, he's a prick. all of the time'
Heine's bravery knows no bounds, he's decided to write about the post and the ensuing discussion, using the ol' Womenz Haz No SOH saw but doesn't link to us because he doesn't want to raise our stress levels or get nasty emails (apparently he is expecting death threats). So he's paternalistic and melodramatic by turns. Wonder if it's his time of the month?
i don't think guys would be too happy if it got turned around to be 'don't worry about him, he's a prick. all of the time'
Was it Rita Rudner who had a bit about this? Something along the lines of at least with us it's only a couple of days a month?
Heine is a tosser. death threats... does he think we all have PMS?
This is one of those days when that shit just makes me SO TIRED.
And Heine ignores the point of was making. The site itself is silly, peurile and offensive, but it was just headdesk stuff for me, until the NZ Herald chose to say that it would "save lives." That's when it got stupidly offensive, in a clunking, loutish, heavy handed way.
Poor old Clint - I think he may not have read the article properly. Either he's missed the implication that PMS causes violence against women, or he thinks it's part of the joke we're taking too seriously. I also enjoyed his completely non-ironic use of the word hysteria - bless his cotton socks.
We sneer at that which we do not understand. Including women.
"We sneer at that which we do not understand"
That kind of explains his Eastwood personae; permanently confused, permanently sneering (with apologies to Eastwood)
d4j has now posted this to the Kiwiblog thread (which had gone to sleep):
radical feminists at the Hand Mirror get laid in concrete that’s why they’re so bitter and twisted
Sheesh, being called bitter and twisted by d4j is a whole new world of hypocrisy! :-)
Post a Comment