So Kim du Toit wrote a much-linked essay decrying “The Pussification of the Western Male”. I haven’t responded to it, because it seems pointless. The du Toits of the world have always been with us; before my parents were born, people like du Toit were panicking over the exact same thing. (That’s why the Boy Scouts were originally created, to counteract the alleged feminization of the Western male all those decades ago).
For me, arguing about if “pussification” of the Western male is taking place would be like arguing about if Jesus Christ was lord. It might be entertaining, but there’s absolutely zero chance of changing any minds. Du Toit is coming from a position of faith, not a position of evidence.
Frankly, I hope that du Toit’s right, and that the West is being hopelessly pussified.
Pretty much every evil thing in this world can be laid at the feet of non-pussified men; the sooner every last male is pussified, the better, as far as I’m concerned. (Yes, I’m aware that many non-pussified men have done a lot of good by joining the army and protecting the pussified men and the women from the invasions and deprivations of other non-pussified men. But that’s a dubious argument in favor of non-pussified men; if there were no non-pussified men at all, then the protection of non-pussified men would never have been necessary.)
Let me tell you, the Nazi party was anti-pussy. The kids who beat me up in the schoolyard were anti-pussy. The guys who killed Matthew Shepherd were anti-pussy. The KKK was anti-pussy – by bravely getting together in mobs and killing individual black people, they proved what men they were. The crusaders were not pussies, and neither were the Japanese when they attacked Pearl Harbor. Jack the Ripper was no pussy. Truman was no pussy, and if you don’t believe it just visit Hiroshima. Andrew Jackson wasn’t a pussy, either.
Hitler: not a pussy.
Stalin: not a pussy.
Charles Manson: not a pussy.
Wouldn’t it have been great if all these guys had been through pussification, though? Wouldn’t history have been immeasurably improved if they were “objectively pro-pussy”?
The man who beats his wife is anti-pussy. The man who teaches his son to fear being seen as a pussy, is anti-pussy. The frat house guy who participates in a rape because he just has to score, because otherwise he’s a pussy – is anti-pussy.
Saddam was all about not being seen as a pussy, which is why he so resisted backing down even when that would have been the most rational course of action. George W. Bush is all about not being seen as a pussy, which is why he was so determined to invade Iraq in the first place. (Whenever someone says that we must stand tough in foreign policy to “maintain credibility,” that’s a code-word for “we don’t want to be pussies”).
Frankly, when every man in this world is too much of a pussy to hit his wife, to bash another gay, to value macho posturing above peacemaking, and to pass on to his son a fear of being seen as a pussy – well, then, this world will be much, much closer to paradise.
I read some Christian blog (sorry, lost the link) which was complaining about all those pussified imagines of Jesus Christ – you know, the ones with long hair and doe eyes, maybe smiling gently on some children at play or some other pussy bullshit like that.
In response, let me say:
Hey, God, you pussy!
Pussify us, please God!
Please, bless us with pussification! As much pussification as possible, as soon as possiible! Blessed be thy hallowed pussification!
Pussify us, O Lord, so that thy pussified Kingdom may come!
* * *
That said, several people have been less dismissive than me, and have written good and interesting rebuttals to du Toit.
The funniest I’ve read is Philosoraptor’s “The duToitification of the Western Conservative.”
Feministe provides a very well-thought feminist rebuttal.
And so does Avedon Carol, in her essay “The Wimpification of Conservatives.”
Sara at Diotima also has an interesting reply, although I don’t agree with everything she writes. For example:
Okay, I agree that basing manliness on hunting and fistfights is dumb, but what about bravery and integrity are particularly masculine virtues? Surely these are equally desirable traits no matter what a person’s sex is, so why connect them to masculinity at all?
No related posts.