Lucrezia Magazine


  • Photobucket

Sponsors



The Cozy Spot



4 posts categorized "Chauvinist Twats"

August 31, 2008

The Re-Education of the Female: Misogyny Disguised As Self-Help

Reeducationcover1 There have been many male authors advising women on relationships; from John Gray, to Dr Phil, and the latest wank-job, Dante Moore, is another to join the ranks of suave (snake oil salesmen) car salesmen promising to cure relationship woes.

I came across an article relating to The Re-Education of The Female (yes, that's the title) in The Daily Telegraph. The DT alleges that this book has become a bestseller. Where is the proof? But more importantly if this book is a bestseller, then it makes me wonder how many insecure women are out there who'd buy this bullshit; Jezebel isn't impressed with this book, and I can't say I'm surprised. Which functional women would take a book like this seriously? Some of the content is enough to cause irritation, anger and outright derision, and really, I don't care what the author's ethnicity is; being an asshole is an equal opportunity quality. It exists in all ethnicities. Here is one idiotic quote from this idiotic book that was published by a female erotica editor and author (Zane):

"When you go to the grocery store to shop, do you pick out the nastiest-looking, most rotten, smelliest fruit or meat you can find?  "Oh you don't? Why not? It's the same with men when they see  ... baby elephant-sized, out-of-shape women."

So Zane presents us with this idiot, Dante Moore.

The Re-Education of The Female; can you believe the title? It's one thing to publish a self-help book but this book's sales rely on controversy. Is the author a psychologist, health professional or therapist? Why no, he's a frigging computer engineer. The book, according to Dante (in an online interview) seems to be targeted toward African-American women. The motivation behind this book, according to this author:

"Today’s black woman has no idea what it takes to have a successful relationship with a black man or any man for that matter. They are clueless."

But the title of the book, irrespective of the cover, is general: The Female. The last time I checked there was only one type of female of the human species. The Female. If the book is aimed at African American women, why not use The Re-Education of the African American Female as a title?

In the Read My Lips interview, Moore replies, saying that no one is an authority on relationships. If that is the case, then why do these 'authors' (yes, authors in inverted commas) act like authorities that know everything about relationships to provide step-by-step advice? The ironic thing about these relationship authorities is that they have more relationship disasters than any other person (that doesn't read these shit books), and most of them have a history of crap relationships (examples: John Gray and Barbara De Angelis have each had numerous relationships during their public speaking on 'how to have relationships').

I don't know what I find more offensive: the fact that these books are sold based on controversy or that this book is published by a female author/editor.

One key quote, real sage advice from Moore:

"Here's a little secret, ladies: men never really ask for anything. They command…And believe me, what you won't do, ten broads around the corner will."

The above quote or 'advice' is about as stupid as John Gray's comment about men going 'into their cave.' Fuck the cave. Today's men don't chase beasts for food, they don't even face death on that prehistoric level anymore. Every man can get a Viagra prescription in five minutes, but it's practically IMPOSSIBLE for women to obtain RU486 in most parts of the world. The cave...pfft. The wuss alternative; come out of the cave, like a man, and face the issue.

In my experience, men (and women) will do whatever they have in mind irrespective of all the bells, whistles, baubles, sex toys, porn and accessories/apparel will use – if they have a compulsion or craving for straying that is, and no book will prevent that. That's how it is. There is no point sugar coating this reality. It happens everyday.

As for myself, I'm sick and tired of seeing relationship books telling women to act like doormats, and the said books to be written by pathetic douchbags. Life is too short to be a doormat (for me); if it ever came to that then there are vibrators, pets and sperm banks thank you very much. I'm pretty much over the submissive bullshit and now over-the-top submission is supposed to be indicative of independence; hello, that's an oxymoron.

It's amazing how females 'ought' to be 're-educated' and assholes like Moore are allowed to roam the earth to create relationship manifestos and women publish them. Yes, assholes, because only an asshole would talk down to women.

These types of male authors are an insult to men.

August 14, 2008

The Pill & Partner Choice: When Scientists Go Stupid

Do scientists sometimes side with the pro-life moralists? This story does make one wonder because it simply states that women aren't in full control of their thoughts when they're on the pill. Therefore, according to the scientists behind this crappy study (100 women only), the contraceptive pill is at fault for altering - get this - decision making processes.
Science is supposed to be about objectivity but how can a study of 100 women even assert this silly hypothesis? How many women currently take the contraceptive pill around the world? Billions? Are they all partnered with assholes and bastards? The other suggestion made by the researchers? If you're part of a couple, and have taken the pill prior to the relationship, then going off the pill can wreak 'havoc'. In short, women have no control, are at the mercy of chemicals. Hey, they may as well say that we're stupid if we're to believe all that hype based on a study of 100 women, but the assumption of there being a 'Mr Right' (read:solution to every relationship problem, knight in shining armour,soulmate, etc) is ludicrous because it immediately sets one up for failure. Hence the perpetual see-saw. We're on it, when we think everything is perfect, and we're off it when things change, as they do over time. Marriages that last for decades are more about friendship (over time) than sexual attraction, and some marriages that last for decades, if they're not based on companionship and friendship, are based on tolerance or the, "I can't be bothered" thought process. Some do think it is hard work to get out of an incompatible or tolerable relationship, rendering the idea of starting afresh more of a hassle. And it goes on. There are many reasons. I personally don't believe that sexual attraction lasts for decades; I've never seen elderly married couples go at it on the street, in a restaurant or in retirement homes, but those couples that do last have a deep relationship based on qualities other than that rush of sexual attraction.

This pill research business is interesting. What is the scientist's objective here? Are they seeking to improve the formula or hormonal dosage to enable women to pick 'right men'? Somehow, I doubt it. It's impossible to do that via drugs. Picking a compatible partner is about knowing one's self and the other, and being objective from the outset, not compromising on autonomy and respect, among other things. It isn't something that can be done via a pill, so the premise, of the contraceptive pill having a huge influence on partner choice reeks of a little bullshit to me. 100 women, and six male body odour choices. Everyone ought to know that laboratory conditions are strict, controlled and fucking sterile, not a reflection of real life or real life attraction, with its multitudinous scents and behaviors. Come on. Are people silly enough to believe it?  And yes, I'm surprised this study was published in a science journal. Where the male scents are concerned. Scent varies during the day. I imagine that the scents the scientists gathered, were refined to create specific samples, that wouldn't even reflect a real living example.

I can picture the anti-pill/pro-life groups jumping with glee about this research, honing in on the 'wrong guy' focus and using it to further sell their ideology: "Increase your chances of finding Mr Right by going off the pill and using restraint/abstinence as your guide."

Lastly, why I think it's all bullshit? I've had a few Mr 'Wrongs' in my life, chosen when I wasn't on the Pill, so please explain that dear scientists at the University of Newcastle. It comes as no surprise that certain scientists try to insult female intelligence. Here's my unscientific thought - Craig Roberts (the scientist behind this research) should go and eat a dick. To think that these fucktards waste taxpayer money for their university degrees to assert bollocky theories like picking 'Mr Wrong'. How do they explain men picking 'Miss Wrong?' How heterocentric is this research? Highly heterocentric in a world where relationships are no longer defined by heterocentric ideals. Why do gay men pick the wrong partner? Why do lesbians pick the wrong partner? Can Craig Roberts answer that question? Don't hold your breath. It seems that this small group of researchers have a hidden agenda.

June 30, 2008

Assholes R Us

You have to hand it to retired tennis player Justin Gimelstob. He was a light year away from ranking in the top 10, retired last year, and at the ripe old age of 31, was voted in as a player's representative. Gimelstob is a really successful tennis player...his entire pro career earned him a little over two million dollars, and while some may think that fantastic, it's rather pitiful. But what earns him asshole of the week status is this little bastard of a quote about Anna Kournikova:

"She is a bitch. Hate's a very strong word. I despise her to the maximum level just below hate... I wouldn't mind having my younger brother, who's a kind of a stud, nail her and then reap the benefits."

When alpha men become nasty, they always link their aggro to sex. It's about 'nailing' the alleged 'bitch,' like their cocks are Excalibur or something. Who knew? Go figure. I'm wondering if Justin has a better handle on his dick than his tennis racquet.

In 1999, Anna Kournikova earned $11 million in endorsements alone and she still brings in millions.

Eat that Justin.

June 29, 2008

From Kiss-Chasy to Narky Adult: Boys will be boys?

It is not as though one greets the day with a clear agenda to say snippy things to a stranger. I don't pre-plan it, but – like any human – I've been known to unleash a tirade when ordinary strangers annoy me and seven times out of ten it'll be a bloke.. I noted it after I went to the newsagent to buy the Sunday paper.
The dude didn't even excuse himself. He almost knocked me over, snatched the newspaper I was handling, to rip the front page. I didn't see him coming. There I stood, bent over the pile, and whoosh…the yobbo bumped me.
"How rude are you…moron?" I muttered.
He gave me a hairy – irate – eyeball, and I wanted to elbow his beer gut. He didn't apologize for his rush, and immediately grabbed the copy beneath. Would I have reacted the same way with a female? I wasn't sure but I was certain about my run-ins with blokes.  When I pondered it some more, I noted that I've had fewer run-ins with females over the years.

Continue reading "From Kiss-Chasy to Narky Adult: Boys will be boys?" »

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Sponsor - Bondara.co.uk

Premium Space





Shop-Tastic



Visits n Things





  • Readers Online

  • eXTReMe Tracker

  • Photobucket

  • Personal Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Categories

Reviewed By...

© Anastasia Mavromatis 2005 - 2008