Striking a chord
For decades men in America, including Iranian-American men, have been suffering in silence
November 6, 2006
A couple of weeks ago, an article carrying the moniker "Caveman" graced the cover of iranian.com [See: "I'm the boss"]. From the responses it garnered both in articles and letters-to-the-editor, it was clear that many readers were put off by it. What is not so clear is how many readers didn't disagree with it or didn't disagree entirely with it. Since people usually respond only to things with which they passionately disagree, it isn't really surprising that there were no responses supportive of the extreme views posited by the writer.
In my home, my parents reacted quite differently from one another to the article. My maman was horrified and disgusted when she read it while my dad just shook his head and laughed. Witnessing their reactions, I tried to figure out why they responded so differently from one another to what was plainly a coarse and vulgar piece of writing. Whether it's right or wrong, I've come up with a theory to explain their reactions.
Understanding why female readers' had a negative reaction to the article is a no-brainer. The author's outrageous sadistic ranting and vociferous belittling of women was, if anything, provocative, chauvinistic and offensive. The response of male readers to the article may be a bit more complicated to gauge accurately. On one hand, those men who sent written responses to iranian.com were just as appalled and angered by the author's boorish ideas and foul language as were the female readers who responded.
On the other hand, however, there weren't all that many negative responses written by men. Maybe this fact indicates nothing, but maybe it means that somewhere in the article hidden beneath all the foul language and boorish ideas was a message that struck a chord with male readers. Perhaps, many of those men who remained silent actually experienced a feeling of exhilaration that someone finally had the nerve to fight back against what they perceive as the cultural and psychological domination and enslavement of men by women. Notwithstanding the highly controversial nature of Mr. Shirazi's article, it's just possible that many men felt his diatribe constituted a universal male declaration to the women's-lib movement "that we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!"
If his writings are a true measure of his intellect and personality, Mr. Shirazi is undoubtedly a Neanderthal. This does not change the fact, however, that somehow he did touch upon an issue with which some men could relate. Men have felt for a long time that they've been subjected to an unrelenting attack by a feminist culture that doesn't want equal rights, but special rights. For decades men in America, including Iranian-American men, have been suffering in silence. They've known all too well that if they verbalized their resentment against the feminist culture enveloping them that they risked being labeled backward, ignorant, and politically incorrect. Underneath all the crap Mr. Shirazi spewed about being the king of his castle, was this festering issue of female domination of men in modern society. If I had to give this phenomenon a name, I call it, "The Emasculate Conception" and I'd define it as "the forced feminization of men by the women's-lib movement."
The Emasculate Conception is premised on the notion that men can be improved only if they are sufficiently emasculated by women. The purpose of this emasculation is to make the modern man more like a woman. Ever since the 1960s the women's-lib elite in both North America and Europe has waged war on men. With ever increasing success women have been trying to make men feel bad about being men. Today, you find men who have been so beaten down by the unrelenting attacks by the women's movement that they have lost their identity as men. It is mind boggling to think that millions of these sad victims of Femi-Nazism were once happy-go-luck guys whose only crime in life was to act like men.
As women in droves began to abandon their traditional familial roles in the 60s and 70s, they usurped and ever increasing degree of power and influence in society. Gradually the equal rights mantra they beat in the early years of their campaign to emasculate men gave way to increasingly rabid demands from these Femi-Nazis to, "kick him in the balls, he's a man, he deserves it."
By the time Lorena Bobbitt became the poster child for the world's fascist-fems, they were no longer satisfied with merely usurping power and influence in society. By the time they cheered the involuntary and savage severing of poor John Bobbitt from his male organ, the global Femi-Nazi conspiracy had decided that it wanted to excise the ultimate cancerous-evil growing on the body of today's feminist world -- the penis! If they couldn't do it with Lorena Bobbitt's slashing and literal precision, they'd do it by manipulating the male psyche into a more perfect female form. Initially men resisted, but sadly they found that it was just easier and less painful to simply shut up and silently suffer the indignity of being feminized. Many men, however, don't want to remain silent anymore... even if it means being branded as backward by the fascist-fems of the world.
Legions of Femi-Nazis both in North America and Iran would undoubtedly brand as politically incorrect, those men who have the audacity to think it feels pretty damn good to be a man and to refuse to apologize for it! As far as I'm concerned, all the Lorena Bobbitt lovers of the world ought to start getting use to the idea we are not carpets. Men are fed up with women walking on them with the standard Femi-Nazi high-heeled, storm trooper pumps they wear to stomp on the male ego.
There was a time when the virtue of masculinity was celebrated in society. There was a time when men weren't ashamed to look like men, to talk like men, to act like men... .to be men. Now, in today's Emasculate Conception culture, what do you find? If a man wants to be accepted by women today, he has to be feminized, intellectually, emotionally, psychologically and to some extent, even, physically. Ten years ago no one on planet earth had ever heard of a metrosexual.
Now you find them everywhere. While they aren't gay, there is still something that is very unsettling about how effeminate they behave. Am I the only one who thinks it's unnatural that straight men woul want to have a facial and a pedicure, or would want to wear male eyeliner? These poor souls are not only more interested in shopping at pretty-boy boutiques than sitting down to watch a good fight on TV, they are more interested in a good sale at the mall than their sisters, mothers or wives are. North America has turned into a continent of sissies and it's turning Iranian-American men into a bunch of sissies, too.
The process of femininization can be seen everyday today, especially in the media, on the TV and in movies. Through the 50s and 60s, leading men on television and in the movies were, as a rule, strong, wise and infallible: Two examples that come to mind are John Wayne and Ward Cleaver, but not anymore. In sitcoms, the father figure has metamorphosed from the all-knowing, all-wise Ward Cleaver in Leave it to Beaver to the consistent stupidity of Homer Simpson. Commercially successful movies now often feature women who are physically aggressive and dominating to dimwitted, docile men.
In today's cinema and television, most of the leading women are strong, and the men are weak. Take for example, Everybody Loves Raymond. In the sitcom, the perpetually henpecked Ray Barone is expected to endure his wife's domination of him, her lack of sexual desire and her anti-male barbs as she castigates every aspect of his character. When he wants to take off for a couple of hours to play golf, he's "not taking care of his family" (the symbolism of denying him golf˜his putter and balls˜is all too obvious); when he wants to relax in front of the TV after a hard day on the job, he "never talks to her or shares his feelings;" and when he wants sex, he's "constantly mauling her."
As every aspect of Ray's masculine nature is demeaned and belittled, he is portrayed as inferior to Debra, while she is lionized as a superior human being. If he tries to stand up for his male rights, she berates him mercilessly, usually threatening to withhold sex until he backs down and rolls over. No mention is ever made that he works all day to pay for her mortgage, car, clothing, food, insurance, and entertainment while she spends her afternoons at home trying to learn how to cook meatballs, the most important ingredient of which according to her mother-in-law, Marie, is "love."
What's forgotten in the plot, however, is that someone has to sweat and toil to pay for this "love." In essence, Ray is humiliated and punished because he acts like a man and not like the perfect Debra, a woman. How does he respond to all this? He apologizes˜Debra's always right and he's always wrong. If he were only more sensitive, romantic and sharing of his feelings he would be perfect in the tipsy-topsy upside-down world of the Emasculate Conception. For those of us who still think its ok to be a man, Ray might as well just cut off his meatballs and serve them to Debra on a plate because it sure seems that she could put them to better use than he could.
The difference between male roles now and forty years ago is not just a change in entertainment tastes; it is reflective of the feminization of American culture generally. In the late 50s, "Father Knows Best" was a hit TV show, in which insurance agent Jim Anderson (actor Robert Young) would come home from work each evening, trade his sport jacket for a nice, comfortable sweater, and then deal with the everyday growing-up problems of his family. He could always be counted on to resolve that week's crisis with a combination of kindness, fatherly strength and common sense.
Today, television usually portrays husbands as bumbling losers or contemptible, self-absorbed egomaniacs. Whether in dramas, comedies or commercials, patriarchy is dead, at least on TV where men are fools ˆ unless of course they're gay. On "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," the "fab five" are supremely knowledgeable on all things hip, their life's highest purpose being to help those less fortunate than themselves ˆ that is, straight men ˆ to become cool.
Sadly it's not just American TV that shows the unmistakable signs of feminization. Just think about it for a second, what kind of men under the age of thirty-five are on Iranian-American TV today? If you said a bunch of sissies, I give you a big "Amen" brother! Daily Iranian-American TV stations broadcast the message that being a sissy is the natural condition of Iranian men. Through their feminized appearance and the feminized topics they "chat" about they send the message that real men are soft and in touch with their inner feelings. With their feminized propaganda they twist young men's minds into believing that women want this new softer, gentler, sissified kind of man. Normal, hardworking, traditional men are portrayed as ignorant dinosaurs that get nothing but professional and personal rejection in life.
Most ordinary heterosexual, non-metrosexual guys can't figure out why is it that women flock to the effeminate she-man types in droves? Perhaps it's because they can share make-up secrets or compare notes on pantyhose prices? Whether one is speaking of mainstream American culture or the Iranian American community, women seem to idolize sissies and pretty-boys. Why is it that many of the apparently male Beverley Hills hairdressers, at first glance look more like women than men? Why do most of our young male entertainers and singers have longer hair than their mother or sisters? Why do they want to wear the tightest of skintight jeans? God, some of those outfits are so tight that they have got to hurt like hell. I can't figure out how they can even get into such tight trousers unless of course, they've greased themselves up with Vaseline before being able to shimmy, shake and slide into them.
The problem in America today is that men, including those in our community, are turning into a nation of Rays. The standard held up to us is entirely female. This can be easily witnessed by the number of straight men so feminized that, like women, they are obsessed with their appearance, daub on makeup and opt for aesthetic surgery to "enhance their beauty." Today, men are supposed to have "relationship skills," and they are expected to be capable of achieving "greater intimacy, to be in touch with their inner child, and to openly express their emotions." They are supposed to be "soul mates" and to "communicate," not as men, but the way girlfriends do. Above all they are never to act like the testosterone-charged lovers God created them to be, but as weak, milk-toasty wimps that have been successfully indoctrinated in the culture of the Emasculate Conception.
Women, however, are allowed to be woman which means they don't have to abandon their typically feminine quality of be a hypocritical when it suits them to be. They still want the luxury of having it both ways. Most of the time, they prefer to have a sissified and emotionally emasculated man around to dominate, but when there's hard work to be done or bills to be paid, they wants their little sissies to act like "real men."
What is the result? A generation of guys totally bewildered, confused and disoriented. Let's face it: a man's needs are pretty minimal. All he really needs to be happy in life is regular sex, a couple of hours each week of being in command of the TV remote control and a cold Bud once in a while. Instead, what he gets is hassled whenever he shows even the slightest amorous appreciation for the opposite sex if he is single or for his wife if he is married.
The woman's-lib dogma has imperiled American society because the feminist movement has upset the natural order of life. Feminism's insidious nature is apparent when one thinks of how it has taught women to use the one weapon they have to tame and feminize men. Being both shrewd and cunning, women have learned to withhold the one thing a man can't' bear the thought of doing without. Knowing that most men will do anything to get laid, women have learned to use sex to blackmail and browbeat men into submission. Their new mantra is "if guys want our bodies, they're going to have to be the kind of men we want them to be... sissies."
Through this hideous misuse of sexual power to abuse men, women have forgotten one small truth Mother Nature has made us the way we are supposed to be through millions of years of evolution. Consequently men are supposed to act like men and women are supposed to act like women. The Femi-Nazi culture that is trying its best to create a more perfect feminized man is actually wreaking havoc on Mother Nature. Men are not meant to be neutered, androgynous she-male freaks. They are meant to be the burping, goozing, and dirty-socks-on-the-bedroom-floor guys that God meant them to be.
While a twisted few in the Iranian-American community would try to make excuses for the extremely distasteful ideas and foul language used in Shirazi's, "I'm the boss," women have got to know that more they pressure men into becoming more feminine, the more likely it is that even more men will adopt extremist points of view. Women now have to make a choice. They can reject Femi-Nazi culture outright and allow their men to be men while affording men the right to enjoy the fact that their women are women. The alternative is that they can continue to buy into the Femi-Nazi lie. If so, they'll have to keep putting on those high-heeled storm trooper pumps and kicking their men in the balls until they've either feminized them and made them sissies, or until they've turned the poor guy into a chauvinistic-sexist-extremist psychopath like Aghaye Shirazi. Comment