PostHeaderIcon Emasculating Democratic Men

Now that I seem to have outgrown the affliction, after ten years in my hermitage, it is probably safe to admit that I spent most of my life as an incurable romantic. I never minded watching a chick flick, especially if it put a date or mate in a cuddly mood, and even enjoyed reading the occasional romantic novel.

When single, I thoroughly enjoyed courting, and developed a proclivity for rescuing damsels in distress. Even though such chivalry occasionally earned me an eventual broken heart, I couldn’t kick the habit. After a suitable period of melancholy, I would be vulnerable to trying to save another one. Simply put, I loved the feeling of falling and being in love.

Perhaps this is why I was so impressed with Bill Clinton’s speech last night. Even though it was obvious to me that he was lying through his teeth, and leaving out some rather unpleasant episodes in their timeline, I found his narrative brilliantly written and masterfully delivered, for the task at hand. He nearly had me ready to vote for her.

The beginning love story seemed tailor made to tug at the heartstrings of every woman there, and present a very human dimension for the notoriously cold blooded Hillary. The crowd seemed to be eating it up, and I was just shaking my head in grudging respect for his political mastery. He is really, really, good!

This is why I was literally stunned when I read that Rachel Maddow immediately panned Bill’s sweet love story as “Shocking and Rude,” live on MSNBC:

“I think the beginning of the speech was a controversial way to start, honestly, talking about the girl, a girl, leading with this long story about him being attracted to an unnamed girl and thinking about whether he was starting something he couldn’t finish, building her whole political story, for the whole first half of the speech around her marriage to him. I think, unless there were worries that this is going to be too feminist a convention, that was not a feminist way to start. But the end of the speech was really good. I’ve got to say, the top of the speech I found shocking and rude.”

Am I that out of touch with the effects of modern feminism? Have these androgynous creatures so lost their humanity, that a harmless romantic tale doesn’t just evade their emotions, it downright offends them? No wonder Democrats are so desperate to import more simple-minded alien peasants. They apparently have lost all interest in breeding, and raising their own replacement Progressives.

I was still struggling with the implications of this observation, when I encountered Scott Adams’ brilliant explanation for my discomfort. It seems that the Democrats may be overselling womanhood, and peddling ‘Low-T.’ “Selling Past the Close“:

On the surface, the convention is going great. Michelle Obama made a speech for the ages. Bill Clinton was his masterful self. Bernie gave a full-throated endorsement of Clinton. The whole affair has been a festival of inclusiveness. The media is eating it like cake. All good, right?

That’s how it looks on the surface. And if you’re already a Clinton supporter, it probably looks great all the way down.

But if you’re an undecided voter, and male, you’re seeing something different. You’re seeing a celebration that your role in society is permanently diminished…

It is subtle, and may not be obvious to the casual observer; but Adams is not the average observer, when it comes to persuasion techniques.

I agree with Michelle Obama’s gratitude about Clinton’s success so far, and how the country now “takes it for granted that a woman can be president.” That’s a big, big deal, and an accomplishment that you can never take away from Clinton, no matter how it all ends. I would argue – as did Michelle Obama – that Clinton already removed the glass ceiling. Now it’s just a question of who the voters prefer.

And that brings us to a concept called “Selling past the close.” That’s a persuasion mistake. Clinton has already sold the country on the idea that a woman can be president. Sales experts will tell you that once the sale is made, you need to stop selling, because you have no chance of making things better, but you might give the buyer a reason to change her mind.

This is a profound observation. I seriously doubt that there are very many Americans who much care about the gender of the POTUS. I would have voted for Sarah Palin in a heartbeat, back in 2012. Actually, we are about the last significant country on the planet, which has not already had the good fortune of a female head of state. Hillary certainly didn’t lose in 2008 because America wasn’t ready for a woman.

As Michelle Obama said, we now take for granted that a woman can be president. That sale is made. But Clinton keeps selling. And that’s an enormous persuasion mistake.

I watched singer Alicia Keys perform her song Superwoman at the convention and experienced a sinking feeling. I’m fairly certain my testosterone levels dropped as I watched, and that’s not even a little bit of an exaggeration. Science says men’s testosterone levels rise when they experience victory, and drop when they experience the opposite. I watched Keys tell the world that women are the answer to our problems. True or not, men were probably not feeling successful and victorious during her act.

Let me say this again, so you know I’m not kidding. Based on what I know about the human body, and the way our thoughts regulate our hormones, the Democratic National Convention is probably lowering testosterone levels all over the country. Literally, not figuratively. And since testosterone is a feel-good chemical for men, I think the Democratic convention is making men feel less happy. They might not know why they feel less happy, but they will start to associate the low feeling with whatever they are looking at when it happens, i.e. Clinton.

Feminists may be winning their battles in the Democratic Party; but can they win the larger war, after emasculating and chasing away all the men? I notice Trump makes me laugh a lot. I no longer even laugh at Hillary, much less with her. Testosterone? 😉 â—„Daveâ–º

6 Responses to “Emasculating Democratic Men”

  • Chris says:

    I didn’t watch much of the republican convention but I have watched none of the democrat love fest. In part because of the damage to the above mentioned testosterone level, but more so the inevitable ten IQ points it would cost. (I can’t afford any) To quote those immortal words, “At this point what difference does it make?”

    It’s my belief that once this election is over the country will not be allowed to reconcile. In other words in the past a president is elected and seated. Once done there is dissent and disagreement but acceptance that the president is the legitimate head of the union. They won’t let that reconciliation come about. Both candidates are so repugnant to the opposition as well as some of those that wouldn’t normally be opposed that the pot will stir itself with little promotion. Once that happens all bets are off.

    • Understood Chris. Likely prudent.

      Pat Buchanan agrees with you.

      I presume you would agree that the same conditions would obtain, regardless which Republican had been nominated in Cleveland. I would suggest that the polarity would be even greater, if the Canadian Born Again preacher’s son was Hillary’s opponent. 😉 â—„Daveâ–º

      • Chris says:

        Quite possibly but it would at least be nice if the nominee showed an interest in bringing those that oppose him around. It has been and still is my position that Trump has no interest in winning the presidency. Nothing he’s done so far tells me anything different.

  • I have not watched any of the Democratic convention. As far as Adams comments on testosterone goes … any man willing to support or vote for Hillary is already testosterone deficient anyway so as Chris says “what does it matter at this point?”

    Rachael Maddow is a female sell out so her opinion matters not except to the whining “less than” females among us.

    Who was it that said not so long ago that females GAVE UP THEIR INNATE POWER when modern feminism raised its ugly head? 😉

    The one memorable thing that I heard from the Republican convention came from Pence and went something like … YOU CAN’T FAKE KIDS.

    Anyone who can raise 5 children under the circumstance that Trump has … has already conquered 3/4 of the challenge to run this nation.

    I know that will probably irritate the crap out of those who are wishing for him to fail … BUT TOUGH COOKIES … LOL

    Frankly I am tired of listening to citizens snivel and whine about how off the rails the USA has become … it is that way because they do nothing but snivel and whine.

    We as citizens do have a fair amount of power … it is time we start using it. I am not talking about simply voting or not voting.

    I have noticed something over the many years I have counseled those in trouble or think they are in trouble.

    If life sucks it is because one allows it. Adult people are victims by choice. It is as simple as that.

  • Those were the only two speeches in the convention worth talking about, and Michelle’s was devoid of content.

    Bill gave a great speech and set just the right tone. If you went into it wanting to buy in to it, you could. He spoke about her early career accomplishments and their romance. If you were feeling skeptical though, it occurs to you that her accomplishments might not be so pristine after her endless string of ethics scandals, and the way he left office kinda kills the mood.

    Two impressive speeches in the whole convention. Trump topped that with his kids alone. I just rewatched Erik Trump’s speech, and I think it had more solid content than the whole DNC.

  • Stan Grimlie says:

    Whether through misguided nurturing, intentional shaping of perceptions, fear of offending someone, or Democratic party politics, the result has produced an emasculation of American men rising to alarming heights threatening traditional society and our economic future.

Leave a Reply

Political Spectrum
Political Circle

Think Up/Down not Left/Right

Internal Links