Thursday, February 03, 2005

An old parable, in honor of the superbowl...

Men meet on the grid of iron, iron! So they all know the rules and lines as men like to know. They know what lines to cross and which not to. They were taught the rules of the lines. This is what figures. There is no one there to ask about their figure, "How's my figure?" For that's a hard sort of figure to figure out. Although one might like to do some figuring on it.

But no, on the grid, it all figures. Will players seek to bend the rules? Will it be those weaker of them? Will they be caught if they do?

Tweet, tweet! Yes, someone has been caught. He was offsides. Look at this wretch who was not on his own side of the line. He says, "Don't be intolerant, I just wanted to see things from all" But no one listens to his excuse. For he had violated the law, a law like iron. He was off his own side for all to see.

Just which side was he playing for, anyway? The men who were at his side look at him. One whispers, "Somehow, he just looks like he wants to play for the other side." Another says, "Yeah, I thought he was a little too nicey nice with the pats on the butt all the time too!" That law breaker and blurrer! Now he must see things from the side again, the side line. So he goes off of the gridiron. For he would break the grid.

The offense tries to move down the field but the good guy's side intercepts their deeply offensive attempt. So the offense is turned on its head by a very fast good guy. He runs down the field, faking them all out. He has not broken the law of the grid of iron with his interception, not at all.

So he runs, he scores, as the cloud of witnesses all around watching goes wild!

(And so, the Eagles win....on a wing and a prayer, as the birds of prey must pray.)


Anonymous said...

But these men made of iron, these men all aglow,

Why do they fight, why scuffle they so?

Is this not because

Our society's "bra's"

Have restrained them from what every man knows?

Men pretend not to know of this thought that I speak.

And those considered corageous, are but effeminate, weak.

Our culture doth dictate:

Men shall not remonstrate.

So he is bravest of all, who never does speak.

Away then with duels, they'll be no more fightin'!

Or women might scream "little kids, they'll be frightened!"

Pretend there's no honor,

Our lives will be better!

And these warriors may battle, but, on a field, without metal.

For fighting is wrong, as everyone knows

And the "woman" inside us has forced it to go.

Thus for "civilised" men

Who would not become "women,"

There remain only games, yes, a show.

The moral is this, in case you've not guessed it,

Men need to be leaders; and to lead, they are fit.

They're made to 'go boldly,'

They're designed to fight nobly,

But only in "sports," now, can a 'fight' thus be pit.


mynym said...

"For fighting is wrong, as everyone knows

And the "woman" inside us has forced it to go.

Yeah, I'll get in touch with my feminine side if I get married.

Note the general attitude of journalists,
"And it was a joke, too, when Katie Couric, on NBC, asked a bride who had been jilted at the altar about a proper remedy: “Have you con sidered castration as an option?”

Warren Farrell, a California psychologist and former board member of the New York chapter of NOW, was exercising at his home near San Diego, watching the Today show, the morning Katie made her castration joke. In his book, Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say, he won dered what would happen if Katie’s cohost, Matt Lauer, asked a jilted groom, “Have you considered the option of cutting off her breasts?”
Well, Farrell didn’t really wonder what would happen. Like every body else, he knew. “NBC would be considering the option of cutting off his contract.”
The difference between the two is obvious, isn’t it? Castration is funny. Cutting off breasts is not funny.
But Warren Farrell was on to something. An executive at CBS News—who doesn’t want his name attached to such an un-PC idea— calls it the “License to Overkill.”
“Any group that feels, rightly or wrongly, that it has been oppressed, no matter how much or how little, has the license to overkill,” he told me. “It’s sort of like James Bond’s 007 license. But that’s just a license to kill. “Once you have the license to overkill you can say just about any thing you want about the oppressors. And get away with it.”

The New York Times—the paper that worries about the “wounding power of slurs”—apparently possesses this 007-plus license. Take a story by Times reporter Natalie Angier that begins this way:
“Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically... why doesn’t he just go away?”

Or how about this story by the same Ms. Angier: “Today is Father’s Day. . . . We women are supposed to. . . make them feel like princes while letting them act like turnips.
“The section you are reading is about women’s health. And so what better place to address the question: Are they worth it?. . . Do we live better with men or without them?”

Men should not lose their sense of humor as some feminists have. This is what passes for clever at the Times. But what if she had written that blacks commit a disproportionate amount of violent street crime, make up a disproportionate number of inmates in our prisons, and because of that, drain tax dollars that might otherwise go to libraries and museums and homeless shelters? Are they worth it? Do we live better with blacks or without them?”

The reason one question is supposed to be legitimate and the other isn’t is that blacks (or gays or women) haven’t lived the life of privilege and power that (white) men supposedly have. The License to Overkill lets Ms. Angier and the Times ask dopey questions about whether men “are worth it” but would never allow someone to ask another bigoted question about whether blacks are worth it.

Sometimes it’s important to state the obvious: Not all men—not even all white men—have power and privilege. Some work in corner offices on the fiftieth floor, and some work in coal mines and fast food restaurants."
(Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News
By Bernard Goldberg :133-135)

He goes on to note some of the things that have happened to some men because of the effeminate and feminist Victims©. It seems some people could be killing someone else, even as they say that they are the Victim©.

mynym said...

It's funny, one time in college I noted that the Left side of the class seemed only to be sniveling about victimization, more and more. They did not seem to like that so much. But then there was no answer, for that was all they knew how to do, being Leftists.