Column: Rise of the Girly Men

1. To Professor F’s comment: “I would much rather read a thoughtful, well-researched, rigorous opinion piece that I disagree with than see such random spewings dignified by publication.”

   When has an opinion conveyed a form of thorough research? Of course you would expect a college educated person to have some adequate knowledge of a particular discussed topic before taking a stance, but isn’t an opinion a PERSONAL view on something? I mean, was Tiffany writing a dissertation or research paper? If she were, I would negatively critique her for her lack of thorough research. However, the fact is, Tiffany was writing an OPINION piece. The definition of “opinion” in any dictionary does not convey any form of absolute objectivity. An opinion is really a subjective view and a personal perception of a particular idea, subject, or topic being discussed.

   Is the issue really a matter of Tiffany’s lack of thorough research on the subject or her opinion on the particular subject matter discussed? I mean, what if Tiffany wrote this amazing thoroughly researched dissertation on the topic and still came up with the same conclusion, would the LGBT community react any differently? Is this a matter of an lack of tolerance for an opposing view?

2. Thank you, Professor F, I think you’ve better gotten to the point than any other commenter.

   What I would like to add, is that while there is a negative response directed at Ms. Lew, what we should be upset about the fact that this young woman has received such a poor education that she feels it is appropriate in any setting, let alone an article intending to represent an entire community, to express her views in such a negative way. I’ll refrain from using all of the “ism”s and the name calling, but there is no denying that there is a lack of knowledge, concrete evidence, research, and human empathy in Ms. Lew’s article. She seems to believe that anyone who does not fit into her idea box of manliness (in terms of straight men) should just go away and never come around again. While one will inevitably be angry with Ms. Lew, we have to realize that this is a failure on societies, and her educational institutions’ part to teach her that these ideas are neither “good” in most sense, nor appropriate to express in a public format. Yes, Ms. Lew is entitles to her opinion, but when she is writing something that is intended to be read by and wide and very diverse audience, she has to know what is and is not appropriate.

   On another note, while Ms. Lew is in desperate need of some education and a wake-up call, we also have to take a good look at the people who PRINTED this article. No matter what excuses they have, the fact that Ms. Lew’s article made it past three editors and into public view show a lack of care and concern for what The Aggie stands for. If the staff so strongly believes and states that they do not share views with Ms. Lew (and can apparently back it up by listing off all of their queer coverage, just as Ms. Lew lined up her gay friends and Ellen watching), then they should have never posted it. There is something lacking in The Aggie staff is they honestly believe that allowing this article to be released was acceptable. Again, no excuses can cover this large “mistake” on both The Aggie and Ms. Lew’s part.

   Here’s a final though: why has no one apologized? They have posted a retraction, and attempted to cover their asses by using the age-old tool “but we have gay friend too!”, and yet there has been no “I’m sorry.”
   Why don’t we START with that?

3. Ms. Lew has an absolute right to her opinion, but not all opinions are worthy of publication in a respectable journalistic outlet. I am a faculty member here, and I have often wished that the Aggie did a better job of reflecting and respecting the UCD principles of community. Is the shock value of (literally) sophomoric, uninformed opinions really worth making our institution look so stupid in the eyes of other college journalists, visitors, prospective students, and alumni? Worth making gender-nonconforming young adults feel even more vulnerable? Worth insulting faculty and staff members who work hard for this institution regardless of how we wear our gender? Ms. Lew clearly needs a better education in matters of gender and sexuality, but the Aggie needs to have higher standards in what they choose to publish. As an LGBT person with a gender-nonconforming partner, I would much rather read a thoughtful, well-researched, rigorous opinion piece that I disagree with than see such random spewings dignified by publication.

4. BeingPC,

   The reason you’re so vehemently defending this column is because you think the same way Ms Lew does.

   1) Inability to see beyond your own narrow experience and conceive of different ways of being? Check.

   2) Condescending, belligerent attitude and use of preposterous stereotypes about those who hold these beliefs or live their lives in a way you think is against your own twisted idea of “nature”? Check.

   3) Inability to understand when someone points out flaws in your argument, and a subsequent resort to chicken-s*** rhetorical sophistry? Check.

   4) Criminal stupidity regarding historical event, complete with pretentious name-dropping of movements/figures? Check.

   Thanks for continuing to provide a strong example of the kind of oppressive, bigoted, clueless, smugly superior thinking that Ms. Lew’s piece props up. You’ve made our point more effectively than any response articles or “witch hunts” ever could.

   You may now return to SAVING THE WORLD WITH SCIENCE.

5. 1) If you claim that civil rights movements Um I never said SH1T about the civil rights movements being useless. Way to put words in my mouth.

   2)I am not a manly man. I am neither a conformist nor a fashionable non-conformist. I am comfortable with who I am regardless of what societal norms are, but don’t feel the need to go around proving I’m an “individual” to anyone because it is none of their damn business what I do in my life anyway.

   3) Tiffany didn’t oppress them, she stated that this fashionable trend of being “girly” is dumb. That’s her opinion and she meant that in regards to men who are straight. Personally, I think if it is something men are doing to be trendy it disrespects and diminishes the true personality of a man who is slightly more effeminate. I happen to be friends with a man quite like that and while I wouldn’t find him my physical type (PS smart child, I’m a GIRL) he is a good guy nonetheless. I am not stating that Tiffany was right, just that it was her view on what she finds sexually appealing in straight males.

   4)Biology. I mentioned that only because there is a natural tendency toward men for what is “the norm” in behaviors and mannerisms. Sorry but that’s just that, it is reinforced over and over in nature. It isn’t what ALWAYS happens but it is what tends to happen more frequently. I reject that just because it is something that occurs naturally, but has also yes been reinforced by centuries of stereotypes, it has to be wrong. It is entirely possible to acknowledge past prejudice, escape them but still accept that they existed initially because of a matter of biology so they will most likely continue to be the general majority trend.

   5) Whatever I do for biochem, whether it be for selfish purposes or the “good of the community”, it is going to be ten times more useful than deconstructing a word or an article of opinion because people aren’t comfortable enough with themselves to be tolerant of the myriad of opinions in the world.

   Peace out folks. This was fun. Since clearly you are all too closed minded to listen to a word I said (which is why going to the witch hunt this evening would have been pointless, also irony, that the community preaching it can’t be tolerant. As usual) I’m just going to focus on my biochem because my motives MUST be bad if I disagree with you all. To quote Adam Smith “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the baker or the brewer that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

6. to BeingPCisOverrated:
   Several Things:
   -You stated, ” The only thing more cowardly than a conformist, is a fashionable non-conformist.” Well manly man, you are both a conformist to the masculine world, and a fashionable non-conformist on this blog.
   -If you claim that civil rights movements are not something important to the world, then you must also protest the work of Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Henry David Thoreau, and anyone who has ever fought for equal rights (least you be an inconsistent hypocrite.)
   -There was a time when “Science” found “sound evidence” that women and individuals of African descent had smaller brains than white men, and thus inferior. Even Science lies in the medium of our culture.
   -There was also a time when interracial marriage was outlawed and considered sodomy. It was considered unnatural and biologically unfavorable.
   -There is a difference between acknowledging the “girly men” and oppressing them. Tiffany obviously oppressed them, stating that there is something wrong with how people choose to express themselves. When she states that their expression is a problem that needs to be fixed when it’s clearly not a problem at all, that can be offensive to several people.

   You’re a manly man, Congratulations. Good luck on your biochem project. I doubt your motives are that of service to any community.

7. Yes Wilmagarver, I do agree with you. I love that this article is receiving statewide attention from all types of students and community leaders.

8. Well said Wilmagarver!

9. I don’t even go to Davis, but I had to register and put in my two cents. I just had to.

   If I had known this was the type of stuff one might find printed in a newspaper of an honorable University of California, I would’ve never regretted for a second not choosing to attend. This article makes me feel embarrassed for Lew and for the editors who stood behind her in printing it.

   Even if Lew meant it as a joke, I found not the slightest witty remark within the article to support this humor. It’s just a STUPID article. “STUPID”, because I don’t want to waste a better word on such a crap piece. The ideas are incontestably offensive, yes, but strip away the controversy and you still have a piece of sh*t article. Of all things, why did she choose to reference the 1920s lesbian feminists? This girl was asking for it. & In regards to this being an opinion piece – there’s got to be a myriad of opinions in one’s mind that aren’t as vapid and ignorant as “girly-men”.

   Tiffany, you obviously have balls, Now go see if you can grow a brain.

10. I’ve got comment updates that alert me to this while I BLAST my projet for biochem.

    It’s called technology. I’m good at it.

Comments are closed.