Republican men manly and Democrat men effete?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 7:42 AM GMT
    In an opinion in the NYT on February 1, 2014:

    Portraying Republican men as manly and Democratic ones as effete has been a consistent line of attack against post-Bill Clinton Democratic presidential candidates. As Glenn Greenwald put it in 2007, “For some time now, it has been commonplace for Democratic candidates to be depicted as gender-confused freaks.” He added, “One can make a strong argument, as some have, that those personality-attack themes have played a far larger role in the outcome of the last two presidential elections than any substantive issues, and liberals simply have nothing close to the potency of the right-wing filth machine in advancing these gender themes.”

    01blow-ch-master180.gif

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/opinion/the-masculine-mistake.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4434

    Feb 01, 2014 5:08 PM GMT
    Ya, remember the Obama arugula incident? They equate sophistication with femininity and the argument works politically. That also explains their dislike of education and science because both of those things lead to a more nuanced view of the world, thus their constant attack on liberal elites. They like to reference the nanny state of Dems but don't recognize their own need for daddy figures running the show. I've seen so many CEOs take on political roles and fail miserably because they just can not stand anyone who challenges their authority. In my fairly broad experience with these CEO daddy types, they're frequently spoiled brats.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14353

    Feb 01, 2014 5:12 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidIn an opinion in the NYT on February 1, 2014:

    Portraying Republican men as manly and Democratic ones as effete has been a consistent line of attack against post-Bill Clinton Democratic presidential candidates. As Glenn Greenwald put it in 2007, “For some time now, it has been commonplace for Democratic candidates to be depicted as gender-confused freaks.” He added, “One can make a strong argument, as some have, that those personality-attack themes have played a far larger role in the outcome of the last two presidential elections than any substantive issues, and liberals simply have nothing close to the potency of the right-wing filth machine in advancing these gender themes.”

    01blow-ch-master180.gif

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/opinion/the-masculine-mistake.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0
    Do these percentages pertain only to angry white men or to men of all racesicon_question.gif
  • LJay

    Posts: 11612

    Feb 01, 2014 5:21 PM GMT
    It is possible that Hillary will remedy this situation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 5:23 PM GMT
    All men, a Democrat hasn't won the white male vote since Johnson '64 most likely.

    It's less about gender roles per se than it is about status. White men vote overwhelmingly Republican, many from the point of view that they are protecting their status and way of life. Even removing that, men of all races vote more Republican than their overall demographic.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Feb 01, 2014 5:49 PM GMT
    I've always thought that republicans come off as more authoritarian and militant, and democrats come off as more liberal and diplomatic (except for republican women, who come off like the crazy grandma in "Flowers in the Attic.") However, in actuality, the US is very militaristic and I often sense our allies push us to flex our muscles much more than the general public/average voters, who vote on things like gay marriage.... I'm not sure if that perception is based on reality or spin, but that's how I see it portrayed on the BBC, for example, which is an interesting source for a perspective on the US, as they seem to show the world stage more objectively and one can see just how much the US has leveraged itself in all areas of interest in the world.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 6:40 PM GMT
    Men who are insecure about their masculinity tend to vote Repub because of the BS stereotype of the Repub party as macho.
    It eases their insecurity to identify as and vote Repub.

    Men who aren't insecure about their masculinity don't do stupid shit like that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 6:49 PM GMT
    This would track with the way John Kerry was sabotaged by the Bush Campaign in 2004. A genuine war hero, a real man, compared to Bush who used the National Guard to hide out during Vietnam, the Republican tactic was to "Swift Boat" his heroics.

    Take away Kerry's edge on the strong macho issue, compared to the doofus Bush. And it certainly worked with male voters, as the figures in the OP show.

    Plus show Bush on an aircraft carrier with "Mission Accomplished" behind him ("just a coincidence" we were told, while the tragic irony of that coincidence was soon to become apparent), and make sure Bush was always backed by a wall of American flags and uniformed service members at attention (shouldn't it be illegal to use our service people as mere campaign props?), and it becomes apparent the Republicans understand this manly factor very well.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14353

    Feb 01, 2014 6:53 PM GMT
    LJay saidIt is possible that Hillary will remedy this situation.
    No thanks. I wouldn't trust Hillary as far as I could throw her. There is just something sinister about that woman that doesn't add up. If she gets the democratic nomination in 2016, I am voting for the republican ticket unless the republicans nominate some tea partier and flaky fundamentalist.
  • LJay

    Posts: 11612

    Feb 01, 2014 6:57 PM GMT
    And how do you fit Ted Kennedy into this canard?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 6:57 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    ...I am voting for the republican ticket unless the republicans nominate some tea partier and flaky fundamentalist.

    I think that's exactly what you can expect. Or at least one who will cave to them, and sign all the declarations the Teabaggers and Fundamentalists put in front of him, just like Romney and the other Republican Presidential contenders did in 2012.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 7:19 PM GMT
    The article basically pointed out the strategy of the GOP saying that the Democrats are waging war against men and the Democrats are saying that the GOP is waging war against women.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14353

    Feb 01, 2014 7:51 PM GMT
    ART_DECO said
    roadbikeRob said
    ...I am voting for the republican ticket unless the republicans nominate some tea partier and flaky fundamentalist.

    I think that's exactly what you can expect. Or at least one who will cave to them, and sign all the declarations the Teabaggers and Fundamentalists put in front of him, just like Romney and the other Republican Presidential contenders did in 2012.
    That remains to be seen, my friend. What happened in the GOP in 2012 does not necessarily mean it will happen again in 2016. You have to keep an open mind on this one. I think the GOP is starting to realize that it is too far to the right for most Americans.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 7:53 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said I think the GOP is starting to realize that it is too far to the right for most Americans.

    I'd like to agree, Rob, but I can't just now. I read all these right-wing websites. The activists---the ones who determine the primary results---are still convinced that only a true fringe rightist can and will win. They despise Romney as the father of both Romneycare and gay marriage---despite the fact that it was the Massachusetts Supreme Court that ruled for it, and Romney actually tried to sabotage it---but since when did facts matter to the obsessed?

    I think your hopes will have to wait for 2020 at minimum, perhaps 2024.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:20 PM GMT
    yes, but Republicans have ugly hearts
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:23 PM GMT
    My prediction:

    The Republicans will lose control of the House in November thereby causing panic in the Establishment element in the GOP, who collectively have access to deep pockets. Blame will be cast on the Right wing of the Party and a consensus will emerge between the moderates and the Establishment that the Party needs to make a significant move to the left to get back to the electable Centre. They will coalesce around a strong Presidential candidate who will attempt to claim the most central position while attempting to portray Hillary as someone who strayed too far from the middle for the average voter (as in too extreme on social engineering and too weak on foreign affairs and economics).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:24 PM GMT
    ART_DECO said
    roadbikeRob said
    ...I am voting for the republican ticket unless the republicans nominate some tea partier and flaky fundamentalist.

    I think that's exactly what you can expect. Or at least one who will cave to them, and sign all the declarations the Teabaggers and Fundamentalists put in front of him, just like Romney and the other Republican Presidential contenders did in 2012.


  • Import

    Posts: 7190

    Feb 01, 2014 8:24 PM GMT
    I hear republicans have the biggest cocks.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:26 PM GMT
    Import saidI hear republicans have the biggest cocks.


    yes but they can't get an erection from all the anger
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:33 PM GMT
    woodsmen saidThe article basically pointed out the strategy of the GOP saying that the Democrats are waging war against men and the Democrats are saying that the GOP is waging war against women.

    Well, considering laws like VAWA, it isn't difficult to understand why GOP'ers think that Dems are waging a war against men.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:38 PM GMT
    Import saidI hear republicans have the biggest cocks.

    You got the wording wrong. Republicans are the biggest DICKS.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 8:58 PM GMT
    Huh, men voting for Republicans has nothing to do with whose effeminate.

    Large and small businesses are run predominately by men. Republicans favor business, Democrats favor government control of everything which chokes capitalism.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 9:00 PM GMT
    mx5guynj saidHuh, men voting for Republicans has nothing to do with whose effeminate.

    Large and small businesses are run predominately by men. Republicans favor business, Democrats favor government control of everything which chokes capitalism.

    Congratulations!
    You've kept your record of never making sense intact!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 9:16 PM GMT
    This seems to be prominent in corporate culture as well, although pertaining to white heterosexual republican men who most often are the ones in power, executive or in top, middle management positions.

    The republican view that democrats are waging war on men probably comes from the fact that the white heterosexual man is being 'left out' of the democrats 'diversity' campaign

    HRC tracking corporate equality index

    Democrats have created 'visibility' networks through employee resource groups (ERG)

    Women
    Gay
    Black
    Hispanic
    Asian
    Native American
    Persons with Disability

    Republican men, who in corporate culture have been traditionally white heterosexual who feel they are not being 'recognized' as a diversity group, such as what the Democrats have done. It also signals a power struggle.

    Corporate "diversity training" that includes sexual orientation, or any other 'minority' status, probably pisses off these men who feel they are not being represented, even though they don't have to be. Democrats who want equal everything, especially prominent for women, feel that these republican white men have attacked women, because according to biblical and their tradition, women should be subservient to the man.

    I cant explain the right wing republican women. Maybe they feel the need to be subservient to the man because that is what they have been told all these years. Maybe they are secret wannabe Lesbians, or hate men in general.

    As the power struggle continues, at some point, the white heterosexual corporate man will finally blend in with everyone else instead of sticking out and having all the power, once this blending is complete, there wont be a need for any minority ERG in corporate life, everyone will have true equal opportunity. As most of these men are of the baby boom generation, its only time now before they retire, with their millions and 'diversity' takes over their once exclusive positions.

    icon_eek.gif

    http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/05/business/la-fi-himi-austin-20140105

    Aerospace President and CEO Wanda M. Austin, 59, says she hopes her background will help her serve as a role model for young women and minorities. (Bob Chamberlin, Los Angeles Times)
    78768430.jpg






  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2014 9:17 PM GMT
    LJay saidIt is possible that Hillary will remedy this situation.


    With hair on her chest that goes all the way down to her balls, it's possible.