In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff


We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.







Try Advanced Search


  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...


CultureBlogs
Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
PhilosoBlog
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Gregdotorg
BookSlut
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Cronaca
Plep
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Seablogger
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette


Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Samizdata
Junius
Joanne Jacobs
CalPundit
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Public Interest.co.uk
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
Spleenville
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
CinderellaBloggerfella
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
InstaPundit
MindFloss
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes


Miscellaneous
Redwood Dragon
IMAO
The Invisible Hand
ScrappleFace
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz

Links


Our Last 50 Referrers







« What Would Andrew Jackson Do? | Main | Is MAYA Extinct? »

February 16, 2009

Linkage

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

* Roissy volunteers a shrewd analysis of a scene in "Hud," inspiring an even-livelier-than-usual commentsfest.

* Rick Poynor and Adrian Shaughnessy compare notes about falling in love with movies in the 1970s.

* Roger Scruton supplies a lot of perspective in this review of a social history of Western music.

* GFS3 cringes at the memory of nine male-nudity movie scenes.

* Thanks to Mexican drug wars, Phoenix has become the kidnapping-for-ransom capital of the U.S.

* Randall Parker is wary of a recently-floated idea for a Fairness Doctrine for talk radio.

* Is financial chaos in Eastern Europe about the take the rest of the world down?

* MBlowhard Rewind: Convenient, safe and attractive parking can help revive a downtown. Santa Barbara has shown how.

* And, just because I happened to be thinking, "Sheesh, imagine 20th century popular culture without 'the Bo Diddley beat'":

Best,

Michael

posted by Michael at February 16, 2009




Comments

I was in Santa Barbara on business for a few days last month and remembered El Grullo from your blog. It is no more, but its successor had kept the decor and served a satisfying, friendly lunch.

SB is a fantastic place but currently a little melancholy, with the recent horrid wen inflicted by the fire in Montecito and storefronts gaping empty on State St.

Posted by: robert61 on February 16, 2009 8:26 AM



Sorry, Michael, but I refuse to pay any more attention to Roissy. The juvenile trash talk is just contemptible.

Roissy is suffering, as many young men are, from the abdication of men because he was never indoctrinated in the male honor system. It's a tragedy

The savagery of his site is pathetic, and probably an inevitable result of the feminist onslaught. That savagery isn't the solution. The solution is to somehow return to indoctrinating young men in the male honor system.

Roissy does not even understand that the strong should not ridicule and torment the weak. He and his pathetic followers should be pitied and ignored.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on February 16, 2009 12:01 PM



The solution is to somehow return to indoctrinating young men in the male honor system.

Commenter Whiskey made an intriguing point on Roissy's blog: that it's not men who need role models today, it's women. Men are doing nothing more than responding to the incentives that young women offer, which is rewarding eternal adolescents and thugs.

Posted by: PA on February 16, 2009 12:37 PM



That Roissy post was actually really good, but man, his commenters are fucking idiots.

Posted by: JV on February 16, 2009 12:41 PM



"Roissy is suffering, as many young men are, from the abdication of men because he was never indoctrinated in the male honor system. It's a tragedy"

Don't you think part of the problem is that men have forgotten that their most important role in a relationship is as protector? A guy who is nonconfrontational, slight of build with average looks and an average job is still an alpha if he protects his woman by providing for her and guarding her emotionally as well as physically. And, no, it's not necessary to establish one's dominance with a fistfight.

The dynamic between a man and his friends is also a good way to determine his alpha/beta status. Any guy who allows his friends to show him disrespect by either hitting on or insulting his woman is a loser. If his friends are determining the outcomes of his romantic relationships, there's something wrong i.e. the guy has to have his friends' approval to feel that the woman is worthwhile.

Another aspect of this group dynamic is that of the friends as protector of the guy. This means that he will go crying to his friends if something goes wrong in his romantic relationship and they in turn will "deal" with his woman for him. Ew! It took me a long time to realize that this was why I dumped an otherwise decent marriage partner. He both failed to protect me from a roommate who disliked me from day one and tattled to his older sisters whenever we had a fight, once even implying they would like to beat me up.

You're dead on about Pick Up, ST. It encourages sociopathy in naturally aggressive males while leaving betas clueless about their underlying problems. We can only hope this fad dies out soon.

Posted by: shiva on February 16, 2009 1:03 PM



'The Bo Diddley beat' gets Pupu's blood boiling!

Posted by: Pupu on February 16, 2009 1:25 PM



... it's not men who need role models today, it's women. Men are doing nothing more than responding to the incentives that young women offer, which is rewarding eternal adolescents and thugs.

You've got a point there.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on February 16, 2009 4:13 PM



Unable to tolerate the raw alphadom at Roissy, Shouting Thomas brings his shrivelled betadom into the comments section of other blogs and whines about the unfairness of it all...

Posted by: JP on February 16, 2009 4:36 PM



A Hindu holy man, I believe it was Vivekananda, once wrote that men would prefer to be lions, but if women allow them, they will become foxes. I've thought about that statement a lot, and I believe it to be quite profoundly true.

Posted by: Charlton Griffin on February 16, 2009 5:17 PM



"Unable to tolerate the raw alphadom at Roissy, Shouting Thomas brings his shrivelled betadom into the comments section of other blogs and whines about the unfairness of it all..."

Nonsense. I have little brief with ST but this is the type of transparently pathetic attempt to assert superiority in the absence of any evidence that makes so many of Roissy's commentators (and Roissy himself, at times) look foolish and small.

Posted by: CyndiF on February 17, 2009 11:31 AM



It's SOP over at Roissy's to use beta as an insult, probably because of the implied self-rating of the insulter as supra-beta, that is to say, alpha.

Needless to say, accusations of beta-hood are only made by those who are infra-beta (pardon the Latin/Greek mixing here). The whole alpha/beta thing has become so hopelessly confused at Roissy's it makes debates about the subject over there completely devoid of interest.

Clio had a far more interesting take on the whole alpha/beta/etc thing at her new blog. Great discussion in the comments--even by people who aren't me!

Posted by: PatrickH on February 17, 2009 1:30 PM



despite his misgivings about the force of nature that is roissy, ST is all right in my book. any guy who has slit the throat of a live pig has earned old skool style points.

Posted by: roissy on February 17, 2009 2:01 PM



What you don't know, Roissy, is that once upon a time, in this very country, fathers taught their sons how to "slit the throat of a live pig" as a matter of course.

This was just essential wisdom for a farmer.

Both of my grandfathers maintained concrete block slaughterhouses on their property. If they didn't kill it, they didn't eat it.

I am sorry that you did not grow up with the wisdom of the grandfathers passed on to you. It is a tragedy. I wish there was something I could do about it, but I'll be damned if I know what to do.

The lack of this knowledge shows in every word you write. You are the product of the war against the fathers. We will pay an incalculable price for disgracing our grandfathers and fathers. I wish that I knew how to save you from the savagery of your ignorance, but I do not.

Posted by: Shouting Thomas on February 17, 2009 5:41 PM



With apologies to P[upu] Larkin:

Sexual intercourse began
'fore nineteen sixty three
(Which was way too early for me I'm kinda stretching the chronological truth here so sorry about that)
Between the end of the Marshall Plan
And the sound of the new Bo Diddley

Posted by: A. Horribilis on February 17, 2009 6:26 PM



ST, you may or may not be right about Roissy being "the product of the war against the fathers" but we're all products of our time, and he's one of the good guys.

Posted by: PA on February 17, 2009 7:43 PM



"despite his misgivings about the force of nature that is roissy, ST is all right in my book. any guy who has slit the throat of a live pig has earned old skool style points."

I hear you're aka wilt chamberlain, roissy. Is this true? Are you really that hot? I mean ST is most certainly an alpha according to how I'd define it: inspires trust, seeks to initiate the younger men into a very positive form of patriarchy. But I get the impression you are offering strategy instead of personality/character - a kind of trick the woman by pushing her evolutionary buttons so she'll obey you're every whim approach.

Posted by: beta blocker on February 17, 2009 8:22 PM



"offering strategy instead of personality/character"

That's a very succinct way of putting it. Pretty much nails my problem with roissy and his type. Not saying they're not successful at what they set out to do, but it's nothing to be proud of.

Posted by: JV on February 17, 2009 10:18 PM



JV, that's one of the reasons the discussion about alpha/beta is so confused over there. In a world without values, all that's left is strategy. Alpha and beta are strategies, and Roissy's most telling points are made when he points to the failure of beta as a strategy, and provides pointers to those who've employed that strategy (with predictably poor results), on how to improve their "score" by taking a "fake it [alpha] till you make it" approach to getting with women.

And yet, moral/character issues keep getting smuggled into the discussion, with beta becoming an all-purpose term of abuse (look at what JP tried to do to Shouting Thomas above, for example) and alpha a generic term of praise. Preposterously but not surprisingly, a group that prides itself on taking a value-free "objective" look at the world of modern mating is in the grip of an unexamined incoherent quasi-moral system. It's as if morality is this fundamental part of being human that the humans over at Roissy's (and they are human, as difficult as that can be to remember) delude themselves into thinking they've grown beyond.

No-one is more controlled by moral assumptions than the man who thinks he doesn't have any.

Posted by: PatrickH on February 18, 2009 10:12 AM



Shiva Don't you think part of the problem is that men have forgotten that their most important role in a relationship is as protector? A guy who is nonconfrontational, slight of build with average looks and an average job is still an alpha if he protects his woman by providing for her and guarding her emotionally as well as physically. And, no, it's not necessary to establish one's dominance with a fistfight

Um you married
I've been saying this for months. Most women won't take men who can't protect them seriously. It's one of the big reasons women the world over, love tall men. It's like some men have tunnel vision and only want to hear what sounds good to them not what women really think.

Posted by: chic Noir on February 22, 2009 7:06 PM






Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:



Remember your info?