The "feminization" of America: is Howard Stern on to something?

From marksfriggin.com recap of the Stern show today:

"Howard brought up the discussion he had yesterday about the ‘‘femininization’’ of America. He was still pushing for more violence on TV. He says that the heads of the TV networks are hard at work cutting out any references to any type of violence in their TV shows. Howard seems to think that’s all wrong because it’s turning our country soft and we may lose sight of the business we need to take care of with these terrorists. Jimmy Kimmel said that his 8 year old son is great at these violent video games so he’s prepared for the future. Jimmy said he has no problem giving his son toy guns either. "

Now obviously the first thing you must do is get past the fact that Howard Stern is in the studio with the hosts of the Man Show saying these things.

That said, is Howard on to something? Is America too “soft” and too PC to do some of the rather uncomfortable things we might have to do to win the war against terrorism?

Consider the following:

-The Pentagon changes it’s name for the campaign from Operation Infinite Justice to “Operation Enduring Freedom”- so that our military, trained to kill people, doesn’t offend Muslims.

-Hollywood and the networks scramble to redo their scripts to write out scenes of terrorism, and references or scenes in or around the WTC.

-Parents being prosecuted or censured for spanking their children.

-Violent video games being targeted.

-Growing movement against toys like toy guns and toy soldiers.

I’m sure there are other, better examples, but I’m trying to open the floor here . . . I think you know what the point is: maybe America has become too sensitive to win a war.

Or are we?

What do you think, Dopeheads?

Is American too “soft” to fight back?

No.
Since when does “feminine” equal “incompetent?”

Perhaps he has a point. In particular, higher education has been largely taken over by women, some survey’s I’ve read indicate current enrollment is up to 60% women and expected to grow to as high as 75% within a few years. Maybe we need a new “Men’s Studies” curriculum.

Yeah I didn’t quite make the connection there too. I guess Because if all mean adopt the stereotypes of feminine behavior like many segments of the media think we should, then those men would indeed be “nonviolent”

Considering everything the two do publicly is for laughs I don’t see why.

Our militarys purpose is to defend America. The name of the campaign did not help that purpose.

But I do see your point. Today Americans preach tolerance for fellow Americans who are from the middle east or islamic. Back in WWI we would have done our best to put them in concentration camps and anyone shooting someone who looked arabic would be considered a hero. We no longer have the guts to commit violence against fellow Americans because of the color of their skin.

Yes, but women are still concentrated in majors such as education, nursing, and various liberal arts that are not as lucrative as civil engineering or computer science. Those majors still have a preponderance of men. I am also sure that most graduate law, med, and MBA programs are roughly 50-50 split, maybe with a slight edge to men.
I am taking an English class as part of my required degree plan. Its has 4 guys (including me) and 30 women. I am also taking a chemistry course, about 18 guys and 12 women.
I never did like English classes in High School, but for some reason - I actually show up to this one ;).

The big thing you’re ignoring is that violence is being criticized in TV and video games because there’s been more and more of it. If violent entertainment is the measure of masculinity, we’re swimming in testosterone.

I don’t think violent entertainment is the measure of masculinity, though. There’s a difference between violence in a war effort and violence for mass amusement. What I took to be the reason why people pushed back terrorim-related movies and such is that movies are supposed to be escapism, and they aren’t escapism if they’re reminding you of real-life horrors. Plus, it seems grotesque to get a cheap thrill out of something that’s causing people suffering IRL.

As for changing the name of the mission, that was tactical. Offending your allies isn’t manly, it’s stupid.

I would double-check these statistics. More than half of high school graduates are now going to college and that number will continue to grow, so the proportion of women in college can’t grow that big. At tech/engineering schools now, enrollment is still much more than half male.

In one of those patriotic “proud to be us” flavored threads that appeared shortly after the attacks, it was said that some people regard our culture as trivial and weak (and sinful) because we allow people to pursue their own happiness rather than demanding that everyone sacrifice for some Almighty Higher Cause; that not only do we allow it, we expect it and take our right to do this for granted.

Keep that in mind and juxtapose it against this from feminist author Marilyn French:

[QUOTE]

The only true revolution against patriarchy is one which removes the idea of power from its central position, and replaces it with the idea of pleasure. Despite the contempt in which this quality has been held for several millennia, pleasure, felicity–in its largest and deepest sense–is actually the highest human good…

To restore pleasure to centrality requires restoring the body, and therefore, nature, to value…If women and men were seen as equal, if male self-definition no longer depended upon an inferior group, other stratifications would also become unnecessary…

The foregoing is a sketch of feminist beliefs…the movement is not aimed at overthrow of any particular government or structure, but at the displacement of one way of thinking by another…Feminism increases the well-being of its adherents, and so can appeal to others on grounds of the possibility of greater felicity. Integration of the self, which means using the full range of one’s gifts, increases one’s sense of well-being: if integration of one’s entire life is not always possible because of the nature of the public world, it is a desirable goal. Patriarchy, which in all its forms requires some kind of self-sacrifice, denial, or repression in the name of some higher good which is rarely (if ever) achieved on earth, stresses nobility, superiority, and victory, the satisfaction of a final triumph. Feminism requires the entire self in the name of present well-being, and stresses integrity, community, and the jouissance of present experience.

?? where the heck did the rest of my post go ??

Umm, the Marilyn French quote was to have been followed with:

So…would I say America is “feminized”? No, I would not use that word. But I would say that it is true that we are not as masculinized in the patriarchal sense of the word as those who took themselves and a planeful of passengers and flew them smack into the side of a building in order to kill themselves, the passengers, and as many people in the building as possible, all for the greater glory of whatever the fuck it is they believe in.

And I would say that I’m immensely grateful for that. For if it were not so, I wouldn’t think it would matter very much which side won.

Maybe feminization is the wrong word. I always thought wussified or sissified might be a better description of the cultural vogue today. Manliness as portrayed on screen by the likes of John Wayne, Roy Rogers, and Cary Grant has fallen out of favor. We teach our kids to believe that trying is good enough, success is not important. That the needs of the few out weigh the needs of the many.

AHunter3 presents us with an arguement from Marilyn French that feminization is about “the entire self in the name of present well-being, and stresses integrity, community, and the jouissance of present experience.” Those ideals are great and if we lived in a world that shared our values of freedom and individualism than we would be fine. But we live in a world that at the nation-state level is not much different than the jungle. To protect these values require men and women who can conform to the more patriarchal qualities, “self-sacrifice, denial, or repression in the name of some higher good which is rarely (if ever) achieved on earth, stresses nobility, superiority, and victory, the satisfaction of a final triumph.”

(Notice French’s use of “rarely (if ever)” in her description of patriarchal qualities. I guess the defeat of Nazism and Japanese totalitarianism, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the reunion of Germany, ending American slavery, and going to the moon were ignoble and not a higher good. Would they have happened in the feminist society of the author’s definition? Could individuals have been asked to make the sacrifices to achieve these goals?)

I think Kipling said something along the lines that “Good men can sleep easy because hard men keep watch.” Maybe in today’s world that should be that the feminists can sleep safe because the patriarchs keep watch.

Both sides have something to offer our nation. However, it seems that the patriarchal qualities have fallen into disfavor despite the fact that these very qualities are what brought about this nation in the first place and continues to keep us free. Today, it is the patriarchal qualities on display as rescue workers dig through rubble and others line up to donate money and blood to the suffering. It is the patriarchal qualities on display as our young men and women prepare to do battle to protect us from fear. It is the patriarchal qualities on display as this nation says that terrorism must be ended.

Are we up to it? It is the feminist movement that has schools banning dodge ball as too violent. Kids don’t pick teams because it hurts the self-esteem of those picked last. Standards are removed or lowered so that no-one has to suffer failure. Students can’t play tag because they might inappropriately touch each other (at age 7?) We agonize over the death of 10 children accidentally trapped in car trunks over a 12 year period and blame everyone but the parents. Why? Well, if we accept Marilyn French’s definiton, these lead to stratification of the superior vs inferior. Under her definiton is it even fair to qualify ourselves as the good guys and the terrorists as the bad guys? Her feminist ideals are defended by people with patriarchal qualities. What happens if the feminists have succeeded in degrading the patriarchal values?

If this nation has bought into the feminist precept that being superior in achievement, talent, or learned skills is a less acceptable form of success than being happy and accepting of failure, then I think Howard is right, we are in trouble.

There are some people who do have concerns about the way male children are treated in schools and society. I don’t have a cite for any of this so take it with a grain of salt.

Boys are more likely to drop out of school, they’re more likely to commit a crime, and though they receive more attention at school then girls that attention is more likely to be negative then positive. I think it is possible that teachers and administrators have been focusing more attention on girls then they have on boys for the past few decades. I only say it is possible so please don’t jump down my throat.

In some ways I think many Americans have gotten a bit soft since the depression generation and we seem to have trouble dealing with pain. We go through great lengths to ensure that everyone is emotionally and physically pain free. Take the recent dislike certain professional educators have for dodge ball. As a kid I don’t remember any serious physical or emotional damage that resulted from any game of dodge ball. I was born in '76 so I don’t see how such huge changes in dodge ball could have occured in such a short time to make it a horrible game.

Maybe Americans just don’t have perspective. We live in a place where all sorts of inane complaints seem important. I don’t know about you guys but on 9/11 an awful lot of supposed problems suddenly seemed very silly and unimportant to me. Not all of them of course.

Marc

Oh, I think we’ll do fine. Problem is, if you can call it a problem, the younger generation hasn’t had a major war to prove itself. If they are called out to fight they will do a fine job, just like the veterans of every other war. People can and do rise to the occasion.

Look at the stunning displays of courage that we all witnessed just two weeks ago! Think of the firefighters and police who sacrificed their lives to rescue victims from the smoldering towers of the WTC! Or what about Jeremy Glick, who, more likely than not, led an unarmed revolt against the terrorists? Glick and company may have saved thousands of lives.

Speculations about this country turning soft are pretty goddamned unfounded!

I did doublecheck the stats, IIRC they were in Newsweek, and I checked when the annual stats for my local university were released, they’re accurate.
In particular, tech careers were said to be most impacted by declining male enrollment. One of the explanations offered was that men are skipping college because they can get entry-level tech jobs (i.e. writing websites) without going to college. Much of the computer industry has moved into the blue-collar niche, one writer described web design as the auto-mechanic role of the new century.

I don’t think so. Brains not brawn…

I am very impressed with the manner in which the US government and to a large extent, its people, have responded to date. Without a single act of violence in retaliation, you have already won a number of major battles. I applaud that.

When the day comes for military responses (unfortunatley they will take place), I expect that it will be all the more effective as a result of the thoughtful and level-headed work done since the unbelieveable events of 11 September.

God be with you.

pax

In some ways I think many Americans have gotten a bit soft since the depression generation and we seem to have trouble dealing with pain. We go through great lengths to ensure that everyone is emotionally and physically pain free

That’s a valid point. Look at how there seems to be a drug available for everything from anxiety disorder to impotence to hair loss. We have prozac, oxycotin, and so many other drugs to medicate ourselves with it’s amazing. Not that a lot of these drugs aren’t miraculous; but are so many of us becoming so medicated that we will stunt our abilities to grow and toughen ourselves as human beings?

The dodgeball comments are very symbolic of the issue I was trying to bring up in the OP. I think Geroge Carlin put it best- we do all these things now to protect our children from getting hurt or injured. But by doing so we are interfering with natural selection.

When a child dies doing something stupid like swallowing a toy or sticking his finger in a light socket, it’s Darwin at work; and if they survive, well as the old saying goes, “That which does not kill us makes us stronger.”

Obviously Carlin’s words taken at face value are offensive, but the point is well taken: perhaps we go too far to protect ourselves and our children from leraning experiences.

You know, this whole “America is soft” thing isn’t new. It’s been said a thousand times by a thousand people for at least a century now. One commentator after another has claimed that Americans have it too easy, that they’re “wussified,” pudgy and feminine and weak.

In fact, the weak, spoiled American was a key part of Japan’s strategic thesis going into World War II. Germany’s too. The Americans were just so weak, so feminized, so un-tough that they’d wimp out of a war. Spoiled babies was all they were, right? The people Tom Brokaw shrieks from the rooftops are the “Greatest Generation” were held in exactly the same regard as today’s generation - pampered, spoiled, wimpy kids who had it all and didn’t know what it was to work hard and fight for what was right.

By 1945, of course, that had turned out to be less than entirely accurate. “America is soft” as a theory was completely wrong in 1941. It’s wrong now. It’s crap.

How exactly is pain beneficial? I fail to see why any rational person would willingly inflict any sort of suffering upon themselves so that they can be viewed as ‘masculine’. That’s absolutely ridiculous. Pain exists so that we know that there are things we should AVOID.

MGibson, have you ever been picked last? If so, do you recall the utter humiliation? Experiences like that did not help me, nor does it help any other kid. It inspired hate and shame in me. Hate for the other children who pick all their friends first and then assume that I cannot play the game as well as them. Shame, because I started to believe it. Avoiding situations like this could very well help a person’s self-esteem. A blow to your ego does not help you unless it is already over-inflated. It only hurts, and serves to make you ‘weaker’.

Oh seriously. The “masculine” value system in place in nation-cultures such as that ruled by the Taliban is imposed on their people. Our “feminized” value system in which we, as individuals, are comparatively free to choose what we will believe and do with our personal lives, are internal. They are ours, and we will not be weak in their defense.

We may not spend as much of our time trying to coerce other people, using force and violence to get our way, but when our values and lifestyle are threatened, we rise to the occasion violently enough and with sufficient long-term determination, don’t worry. Anyone who thinks America won’t stick out a war for the long haul should read the history books.

For the same reason that I question authority regularly and under some circumstances might tell my own government to go to hell, I am willing and prepared to go to war. And if my company says we’re relocating to the top floor of the Empire State Building tomorrow morning, I’m there. If I ain’t gonna be intimidated by my own damn government, I sure as hell ain’t gonna be intimidated by someone else’s!

Marilyn French did not say it was possible to eliminate coercion from life, and when faced with a violent threat like this, I’m ready to coerce. And kill.

But if and when I do so, it will be on behalf of a social system where coercion, obedience, and violence are not the primary underlying principles.

Actually, since I was tall and very skinny as a kid, I was often picked last. While it hurt, it also made me play harder and better to prove that the other team made a big mistake not taking me. There were even times when I got admonished by the gym teacher for bitching out the other team, telling them I was going to make them pay for embarrassing me like they did, and I had twice as much skill as the anyone on his team.

I wasn’t very popular in school. :slight_smile:

More often than not, after a while I was getting picked higher and higher when the other kids realized that they were making the right choice in overlooking my lack of physique in favor of effort.