Fundamentalist Christian Misogyny 101. Ladies need to get their heads out of “emo-porn,” you see. What is “emo-porn?” Welllllll:
Loneliness strikes at the heart of both husbands and wives, but tends to plunge deeper into the emotional expanse of women. This is one reason why wives are seduced by “emo-porn,” virtual infidelity that is more emotionally satisfying before it physically pleases. But like salt water, it creates a worsening thirst. With emo-porn, fantasy men perform stunningly between the sheets of conversation, emotional understanding, and emotional dexterity. Most mortal men cannot deliver such behavior, the way men do in soap operas and romance novels. Just as wives rightly complain when compared to the artificially created women of Internet porn, men should complain when compared to the artificial men of daytime television. Interesting, isn’t it, how they have such exciting jobs—no Joe The Plumbers. In the real world where real men burn through a lot of emotional battery life to make a real living, being expected to behave like men who don’t exist is more than wrong. It’s cruel.
Emo-porn creates caricatures in the minds and hearts of wives. Most men just aren’t and cannot be that attentive, especially in marriage where responsibilities to provide weigh heavy upon them. Husbands are quietly deemed unresponsive and uncaring when compared to emotionally dexterous hunks of daytime lore, chat rooms, celebrity rags, and romance novels. Thus a secretive and snowballing form of marital discontent is born and nurtured.
First of all, this was written by a dude. Stupid ladies, listen to the man trying to teach you the stuff about things!
Um, so yes, what Paul Coughlin seems to be saying here is that silly womenfolk get all caught up by the “nice, romantic men” they read about in the Harlequin romances and watch on the Days of our Lives, when what they really should be doing is staying home and being grateful for the chauvinist shitass Godly Christian Man the Lord Hath Blessed Them With.
Boys aren’t supposed to feel emotions or be thoughtful! Crazy ladies, what are you thinking, wanting men who treat you like human beings? That is not the fundamentalist Christian way, and you know it.
[h/t Nicole Cliffe @ The Hairpin via Joe via Kyle @ Right Wing Watch. Really.]
No wonder these people think same-sex marriage will tempt people away from Focus on the Family-approved marriages! They make “traditional” marriage look like a depressing slog! As a bisexual woman married to another woman, I know FOTF doesn’t approve of my relationship. I guess they wouldn’t have approved of any man I married, either, as I would’ve held out for one who could be bothered to mark my birthday on a calendar. This just proves my theory that they need to focus on their own damn families. Save your *own* marriages, morons. Quit making up excuses, buy your wife some flowers, and leave us the hell alone. We’ll all be happier!
Actually fundy I think most women are more pragmatic about their menfolk than you give them credit for. They understand that romance novels and television programs are fantasy.
“but tends to plunge deeper into the emotional expanse of women”
Oh look. Another micro-penised fReichtard is typing one handed.
I’m going to guess that if this guy is married and he is JUST NOW noticing things like soaps & romance novels, his marriage has a lot more problems than his wife’s choice of entertainment.
Also, what GEL said.
Because woman are too stupid to understand the difference between fantasy and reality.
Good grief! Ladies, words fail me.
Oh those poor, poor put upon godly husbands.
If this applies to all men, then I guess there’s no hope for any of us, gay and straight alike….you know, since all men are uncaring, unfeeling b******s.
I think FOF just made an inadvertent subtle argument for the superiority of same-sex relationships. :-) According to the screed above, it seems to me that two women (or two men) would be more suitable emotionally and expectation-wise for each other than a male-female relationship.
I thought the same thing, @PhilipJ! With the ridiculousness of pre-fabricated “traditional gender roles” out of the way, we can make our relationships much better for both parties!
Works in my family! If fundie families have that many problems, better try a real solution!
Because god forbid a woman have any interests, or any desires, or any fun.
*rolleyes*
I agree with Coughlin that there is an equivalency between the ideas that porn aimed at men presents a mostly unattainable image of women and the romance novels create a mostly unattainable image of men. I just don’t think consuming either fantasy is any real problem.
Phillip said “According to the screed above, it seems to me that two women (or two men) would be more suitable emotionally and expectation-wise for each other than a male-female relationship.”.
Very interesting observation Phillip. From now on whenever I hear an anti-gay religionist try to claim same sex love isn’t as deep or full as heterosexual love I’m going to bring this up and suggest the opposite is true.
Somebody should let Coughlin in on the fun fact that many straight women write and read gay male romance novels.
FOTF has such low expectations of humanity. Men are supposed to be emotionally stunted lumps who do nothing for anybody but themselves. Women are to be broodsows and nursemaids who expect nothing for themselves. Meanwhile same-sex marriage is evil because men and women are made for each other.
You know, FOTF is few years behind on this argument. The Huffington Post had an infinitely superior article about this topic a Couple of years ago.
When I worked at Radio Shack briefly in 1993, quite a few widows came in for something as simple as getting the batteries changed in their TV remote. Their husbands had always handled such simple duties. I worked for a drugstore chain after that, and I heard similar stories from widows about how they suddenly had to learn to write a check, do household finances, etc, because their husbands had died; their husbands had always handled such things. I don’t know if such uneducation/helplessness was a generational thing, but I felt sad about it. Women weren’t supposed to do or learn how to do certain things? That is just asking for trouble when they become widows.
I’m not saying that every woman should – or wants to, or is able to – change the oil in the car, but keeping either sex in the dark on mundane tasks is not a good idea. Even if I were straight, I wouldn’t want to marry the kind of women who FOTF thinks I should – submissive, unable/unwilling to think for herself, etc. So I feel sad if any females are still being forced to grow up in a (Christian?) atmosphere of not being independent, not learning how to think.
Clearly liking a man for his personality/personhood = reducing a woman to a walking vagina with t**s. Clearly.
Oops, wait, nevermind, FoF is just appropriating civil rights arguments without having any understanding of them. Again.