I’m torn about Kim du Toit’s essay about, as I’ll put it, avoiding his gratuitous crudity, the wimpification of the Western male. I’m inclined to ignore it, since it’s unlikely that anyone who found the essay insightful will listen to anything I have to say about it; but du Toit is full of shit, and that, combined with the apparent popularity of the essay on the right wing of the web makes it hard to ignore. I’m torn about it also because there is, in fact, an important and true point in the essay. I’d put the point this way: we’re in danger of undervaluing virtues like courage and self-reliance that are traditionally thought of as masculine. Now, I’d add—though du Toit might not--that for almost all of human history we’ve done just the reverse, undervaluing virtues like kindness and cooperation that are traditionally thought of as feminine. So I see the problem of wimpification as a relatively minor, relatively recent and eminently correctable phenomenon, a predictable case of the pendulum swinging a bit too far in the other direction as we try to correct a bigger and more long-term problem. But I do agree with du Toit to some extent, and I do think that the threat of wimpification is worth discussing. That’s why it’s too bad that du Toit’s essay is such a piece of crap--the wimpification point gets lost in a torrent of bigotry, falsehoods, and right-wing fantasies.
But du Toit’s essay is brilliant in a way he probably never intended—it’s a masterpiece of self-confirmation. His main thesis is that Western males are becoming wimps, and his essay itself proves that there is at least some truth in the thesis; never before in human history has there been so much puling and whining about such inconsequential irritations. Du Toit’s groundless blubbering is, in the end, itself a partial confirmation of his point. In fact, du Toit’s essay probably deserves to spawn a neologism: duToitification and its cognates. You become duToitified when you’ve got it so good that you lose all perspective on the world and as a result exaggerate minor unpleasantries into vexations of Biblican proportions. That is, you become an insufferable weenie.
What duToit’s essay proves is that the more important problem we face is the duToitification of the Western conservative. Conservatism is currently the Colossus of American politics. Extremist conservatives control the Presidency and both houses of Congress, and conservatives exercise virtually unchallenged control of the political agenda; conservatives control their own massive network of media outlets (talk radio, Fox news, The Wall Street Journal editorial page, etc.); they have convinced most other media outlets to shift their message to the right by relentlessly repeating the “liberal bias” mantra; they have established a massive and incredibly well-funded network of think-tanks and institutions to develop, distribute, and defend their message; and they have underway a long-term plan to take control of the judiciary. Never in my lifetime has one end of the political spectrum so dominated American public life. And yet, even given their almost unchallenged hegemony, they just can’t seem to stop their damn whining. To make this all even more insufferable, their whining often has a bizarre, self-reflexive nature. What they whine about is the fact that they are too masculine, too stoical, too heroic for this imagined age of liberalism. Picture one of those movies in which, through time-lapse photography, a character seems to physically regress farther and farther through less and less highly-evolved forms—but in this case, the character simultaneously becomes emotionally more dainty and easily offended until what remains is a kind of effete caveman. A Neanderthal crybaby. A similar process of political devolution and moral sissification constitutes the duToitification of the Western conservative.
Article comments
1 - Chris Arabia
You must have emptied the shelves at your local Cliches-R-Us. But thanks for cramming so much substance into so few words.
2 - Eric Olsen
Great job Winston, very powerful. Thanks and welcome!
3 - Mark Saleski
three words: that friggin' rocked!
4 - duane
The injured duToit's lips moved.
"Philosoraptor," he whispered.
In a tone of horror, Manuel said, "It bit him."
"What bit him?"
"Philosoraptor."
"What's a philosoraptor?"
She looked in the English dictionary.
philosoraptor n [Gr. philosophos, from philos, LOVING and sophus, WISE, deriv. of L. RAPTOR, fr. raptus] intellectual bird of prey
5 - Pete Nelson
Ya know, Winston, I think you could have had a really excellent article if you could have resisted turning into a screed against those you disagree with politically. "Extremist conservatives control the Presidency and both houses of Congress." No, conservatives do. They're not extremists by any usual definition. John Birchers, the militia types, KKK nutcases - those are extremists. You go on to imply that conservatives are stupid, and only a liberal has "... the occasional thought in his head, who read a book at least once, who is interesting or funny, and who treats women like human beings because he actually likes them..." Your article has, unfortunately, several examples of these gratuitous insults, including the completely predictable, banal and juvenile implications about penis size. I really think you can do better.
You had some really interesting points, but you watered down an important message with a bunch of nonsensical attacks on conservatives - as if all conservatives agree with Kim du Toit's ridiculous rant. Some do, but I haven't seen many that give it unqualified support. I certainly don't, and while I consider myself a centrist, I find myself siding with the current administration on more issues than I do the leftists/liberals/Democrats.
I personally thought du Toit's article was mostly pointless and stupid. Yes, men are portrayed as idiots in the media a fair amount. Big deal. Hike up your pants and move on. Shooting guns, swearing, drinking to excess, fighting, and being crude and misogynistic don't make you a man, either. If that's what being a man is all about, then manhood deserves to be made fun of.
It's unfortunate that you felt that you had to take one very extreme example from someone that is a fairly extreme conservative and paint all conservatives with it. Mainstream Democrats protest quite vigorously when they are characterized as being the same as all the extreme leftists/socialists/Marxists that regularly post on, for example, Indymedia. It isn't fair, in either case, is it?
I wouldn't have had any trouble at all if you'd just fisked du Toit's article. It totally deserves it, and it has been criticized soundly by bloggers from both sides of the aisle. But when you turned it into a diatribe against all conservatives, you lost me. In my opinion, it weakened your argument.
I guess I'm just really tired of all the unreasoned vitriol that's spewed by both conservatives and liberals. Name calling, insults, ad hominem, strawmen, and all other disingenuous forms of argument are worthless. They just serve to lower the level of discourse to the point that neither side can really hear the other. It stifles real, substantive discussion on the merits of social and policy positions. It disgusts me. Can't people just debate honestly, with the facts as they understand them to back their arguments?
And BTW, ad hominem is Latin, not French. Yes, a little snarky, but I'm a bit put off by this.
6 - Mac Diva
Insightful. Rational. Funny. This is one of the best blog essays I have ever read.
7 - mmr
"But oh, God, there’s more...somebody...please...make...it...stop..."
I feel his pain