The Pussification Of The Western Male

(No, I did not come up with this title)

This was an essay written by Kim du Toit, a self-described writer/raconteur/grouch. While parts of the essay may have merit, I feel we need to look at a few things that Mr. du Toit points out.

First off, take a look at the essay in full, digest it, and come back to the editorial. It's a lot to take in and I know that when I first read it, I was fairly sure that the author was smoking some of those funny smelling cigarettes, but after taking more of an in-depth look at him and his site, I realize that he is a man that who has serious convictions about a lot of subjects and is not afraid to put them on paper. I may not always agree with him (ok, mostly I don't) but you have to admit he's not afraid to put it all out there.

That being said, here is the essay in full.


We have become a nation of women.

Don't you think that's a rather gross generalization? As far as I know, men still exist (unless my husband has been lying
to me all of these years and his name is really Charlene). Oh, perhaps you were speaking rhetorically?


It wasn't always this way, of course. There was a time when men put their signatures to a document, knowing full well that this single act would result in their execution if captured, and in the forfeiture of their property to the State. Their wives and children would be turned out by the soldiers, and their farms and businesses most probably given to someone who didn't sign the document.

Whenever I read about things like that in history, my opinions were always split in half. On the one hand, I'd like to admire the male for standing up for what he believes in. On the other, it bothers me that he would make that decision, knowing what would happen to his family.


There was a time when men went to their certain death, with expressions like "You all can go to hell. I'm going to Texas." (Davy Crockett, to the House of Representatives, before going to the Alamo.)

I always liked that line.


There was a time when men went to war, sometimes against their own families, so that other men could be free. And there was a time when men went to war because we recognized evil when we saw it, and knew that it had to be stamped out. There was even a time when a President of the United States threatened to punch a man in the face and kick him in the balls, because the man had the temerity to say bad things about the President's daughter's singing. We're not like that anymore.

We're not? Well, didn't we recognize the evil in Sadam Hussein? Aren't we in Iraq trying to help rebuild the country after their people had to live under years of tyranny? Aren't we still on the hunt for weapons of mass destruction? Aren't we busy looking for Bin Laden? I could go on, but you get my drift.

Are you honestly trying to say that we should support the idea of a President of the United States threatening a man who said his daughter didn't sing well? Is that the kind of message we want to send to our children? Mom, Johnny said that he didn't like the color of my pants so I kicked him in the balls today.


Now, little boys in grade school are suspended for playing cowboys and Indians, cops and crooks, and all the other familiar variations of "good guy vs. bad guy" that helped them learn, at an early age, what it was like to have decent men hunt you down, because you were a lawbreaker.

The kids are suspended for coming to school with knives, and bats, and even guns...any instruments that would be considered a danger to the other children. Unfortunately, there are children out there who will hurt other children and this is a way to help ensure saftey. I don't know about Texas, but here in California, kids still do play cops and robbers, etc. at school, but just not with "weapons." They play it at home as well. Just come to my house and spend a couple of hours. Parents play a big part in teaching their kids about abiding by the law. The fact of the matter is, sometimes, it fails. No matter how much you teach a child, there are always some that will turn out bad and end up taking multiple weapons to a school and blow other children and teachers away just as if it were the opening of hunting season.


Now, men are taught that violence is bad -- that when a thief breaks into your house, or threatens you in the street, that the proper way to deal with this is to "give him what he wants", instead of taking a horsewhip to the rascal or shooting him dead where he stands.

See, the thing is, thieves tend to come in to your house with guns, or other weapons. I think the whole premise behind "give him what he wants" is more of a warning to act with caution. Hey, if I hear the thief break in and see him before he sees me (along with my trusty sidekick, Samm (.357), you can be sure that if he isn't flat on his face kissing the pavement when I tell him to, he'll be seriously considering a sex change operation when I'm through with him.


Now, men's fashion includes not a man dressed in a three-piece suit, but a tight sweater worn by a man with breasts.

Now, warning labels are indelibly etched into gun barrels, as though men have somehow forgotten that guns are dangerous things.

I prefer the casual look anyway. I never thought a three-piece suit on a man was all that sexy. Kind of makes them look prudish if you ask me. I keep picturing them in a salon, getting their nails done. I shudder when I think of men with breasts. I must admit to not seeing much of that here, but hey, to each his own. Women have them, why can't men?


Now, men are given Ritalin as little boys, so that their natural aggressiveness, curiosity and restlessness can be
controlled, instead of nurtured and directed.

Um, sorry pal, you missed the boat on that one. Little boys are given Ritalin because the school system is too quick to put a label on children. Ever heard of ADD/ADHD? They refuse to treat the problem when a child doesn't fit a particular model. "He's not behaving, here give him this drug. That'll make him better." (sad thing is, parents give in this way to easily)

And you know what that does? The little boy becomes a man and nobody has helped him deal with his "problems." Pretty soon, he stops taking the drugs, because, what the hell, they don't work anyway. Then, he can't hold a job, he starts using other types of drugs that are much worse. Then he goes into your house to rob you so that he can get a fix. Then you come downstairs and blow his face off. "Shoot him dead where he stands" is what I believe you said.


And finally, our President, who happens to have been a qualified fighter pilot, lands on an aircraft carrier wearing a flight suit, and is immediately dismissed with words like "swaggering", "macho" and the favorite epithet of Euro girly-men, "cowboy". Of course he was bound to get that reaction -- and most especially from the Press in Europe, because the process of male pussification Over There is almost complete.

How did we get to this?

In the first instance, what we have to understand is that America is first and foremost, a culture dominated by one figure: Mother. It wasn't always so: there was a time when it was Father who ruled the home, worked at his job, and voted. But in the twentieth century, women became more and more involved in the body politic, and in industry, and in the media --and mostly, this has not been a good thing. When women got the vote, it was inevitable that government was going to become more powerful, more intrusive, and more "protective" (ie. more coddling), because women are hard-wired to treasure security more than uncertainty and danger. It was therefore inevitable that their feminine influence on politics was going to emphasize (lowercase "s") social security.

I am aware of the fury that this statement is going to arouse, and I don't care a fig.

Good lord, I'm having flash backs of burping, belching, scratching and farting contests. I think that in a lot of cases, America looks to moms because, essentially, it is "Mom" that brings us up, guides us, holds us when we hurt. I'm not sure whether you wrote that statment for shock value, or if you really believe it. Cause fury? Quite the opposite. The idea intrigues me, not because I like it but because, try as I might, I can find no correlation beetween women voting and the power of government. I'd like to see specific examples before I made up my mind, but I don't think they exist.


What I care about is the fact that since the beginning of the twentieth century, there has been a concerted campaign to denigrate men, to reduce them to figures of fun, and to render them impotent, figuratively speaking.

I'm going to illustrate this by talking about TV, because TV is a reliable barometer of our culture.

In the 1950s, the TV Dad was seen as the lovable goofball -- perhaps the beginning of the trend -- BUT he was still the one who brought home the bacon, and was the main source of discipline (think of the line: "Wait until your father gets home!").

Heh, in my house, Mom took care of it immediately, and then we had to tell Dad when he got home. The anticipation of that was enough to do you in. Dad never added to the punishment, but telling dad that you screwed up was much worse.

If you take a look at the economy today, you will see why it's not only just Dad that brings home the bacon. Take California for example. The cost of housing alone is justification for both parents working. Hav you seen the schools here? They suck. So if you want your child to have a good education you need to send them to a private school. Most families don't have the luxury of only needing one parent to work. You have to do what's best for your kids.


From that, we went to this: the Cheerios TV ad.

Now, for those who haven't seen this piece of shit, I'm going to go over it, from memory, because it epitomizes everything I hate about the campaign to pussify men. The scene opens at the morning breakfast table, where the two kids are sitting with Dad at the table, while Mom prepares stuff on the kitchen counter. The dialogue goes something like this:

Little girl (note, not little boy): Daddy, why do we eat Cheerios?
Dad: Because they contain fiber, and all sorts of stuff that's good for the heart. I eat it now, because of that.
LG: Did you always eat stuff that was bad for your heart, Daddy?
Dad (humorously): I did, until I met your mother.
Mother (not humorously): Daddy did a lot of stupid things before he met your mother.

Now, every time I see that TV ad, I have to be restrained from shooting the TV with a .45 Colt. If you want a microcosm of how men have become less than men, this is the perfect example.

What Dad should have replied to Mommy's little dig: Yes, Sally, that's true: I did do a lot of stupid things before I met your mother. I even slept with your Aunt Ruth a few times, before I met your mother.

That's what I would have said, anyway, if my wife had ever attempted to castrate me in front of the kids like that.

But that's not what men do, of course. What this guy is going to do is smile ruefully, finish his cereal, and then go and fuck his secretary, who doesn't try to cut his balls off on a daily basis. Then, when the affair is discovered, people are going to rally around the castrating bitch called his wife, and call him all sorts of names. He'll lose custody of his kids, and they will be brought up by our ultimate modern-day figure of sympathy: The Single Mom.

You know what? Some women deserve to be single moms.

I haven't seen that commercial, but the next time you do, give me a call. I'll hold your ammo for you.

Society today has a strong focus on health. With all of the advances in medical technology, we have found ways of improving our health and living longer. In order for "food related" companies to survive during these times, they need to market their product accordingly. While I wish the folks at Cheerios had found a different way to do that, I can see where they are coming from.

I agree with you that cutting your spouse down in front of the children is a flat out no-no. No arguments there. But don't blame the woman for the man not being able to keep his willy in his pants. The man needs to have the guts to stand up to his spouse and verbalize his feelings about her behavior, not just lick his wounds with a blonde bimbo, who likely doesn't know the difference between a typewriter and a nail file (no more brains than a box of rocks comes to mind). If he doesn't have the guts to try to fix the problem, or "trying" doesn't work, then he needs to rustle up some chutzpah and remove himself from the situation.

People tend to rally around either the mother or the father when an affair is discovered. It depends on who is doing the "stepping out." The sympathy is always going to go to the victim.

Divorce, for whatever reason, sucks. It's worse when there are kids involved. The problem herein lies with the parents who tend to use their children as weapons, instead of stepping back from the situation and analyzing what would be best for the children, rather than how best to hurt the other spouse. In the past, the law has tended to give the mother custody of the children, and the father, visitation rights. Over the past few years, that attitude has been changing but it definitely has a long way to go.


When I first started this website, I think my primary aim was to blow off steam at the stupidity of our society.

Because I have fairly set views on what constitutes right and wrong, I have no difficulty in calling Bill Clinton, for example, a fucking liar and hypocrite.

AMEN! Next........

But most of all, I do this website because I love being a man. Amongst other things, I talk about guns, self-defense, politics, beautiful women, sports, warfare, hunting, and power tools -- all the things that being a man entails. All this stuff gives me pleasure.

Mostly I started mine just to put things down on paper. Didn't matter what. I talked alot about my family in the beginning, then that kind of spread off to other things. In alot of cases, it became a place to vent out my frustrations in whatever way I wanted. I have an insane urge to put "it" down on paper. I just haven't figure out what "it" is yet. I've really just started. Got a long way to go.


Yes, the men are, by and large, slobs. Big fucking deal. Last time I looked, that's normal. Men are slobs, and that only changes when women try to civilize them by marriage. That's the natural order of things.

Real men, on the other hand, have big fucking mean-ass dogs: Rhodesian ridgebacks, bull terriers and Rottweilers, or else working dogs like pointers or retrievers which go hunting with them and slobber all over the furniture.

Women own lapdogs.

Yes, they are. Marriage doesn't change that. Perhaps there are women out there who are dumb enough to try, but they'll fail, hands down.

As far as the dog comment...I don't like lap dogs. Never have. I've got a Basenji/Cattledog mix that pretty much follows me around everywhere. She goes at about 20 lbs, comes up to about my knee, and is one little tough cookie. Of course, (that rock comment is coming to mind again) she doesn't always show how smart she is. We had a balloon stuck outside on a bush in front of the house and she barked at it until the wind blew it away. She holds her own with the other dogs, no matter what size/breed, and if you mess with her family, you'll be getting a birds eye view of what her teeth look like (and feel like).


Which is why women are trying to get dog-fighting and cock-fighting banned -- they'd ban boxing too, if they could -- because it's "mean and cruel". No shit, Shirley. Hell, I don't like the idea of fighting dogs, either, but I don't have a problem with men who do. Dogs and cocks fight. So do men. No wonder we have an affinity for it.

I don't have a problem with men boxing. If men are stupid enough to let themselves get battered in the head until they have no brain cells left, then that's their decision. It's their choice. The animals don't have a choice. They are forced to fight. If they don't they become seriously injured, and in many cases, dead.


Speaking of rap music, do you want to know why more White boys buy that crap than Black boys do? You know why rape is such a problem on college campuses? Why binge drinking is a problem among college freshmen?

It's a reaction: a reaction against being pussified. And I understand it, completely. Young males are aggressive, they do fight amongst themselves, they are destructive, and all this does happen for a purpose.

Because only the strong men propagate.

Whoa, wait a second. Where is your justification for that association? The rise in rape and drinking, as well as other things can be blamed on society as a whole. The drinking and drug usage has risen over the years, and is even more prevalent in our schools, sometimes starting as early as grade school. That's where the education needs to start. By excusing the male behavior because of your so called theory of male pussification, (think Ritalin) you are masking the real problem at hand. The education of things such as this, starts at home, and is strengthened at school.

Now, here's your beer...go watch some football. I'll help the kids with the homework and cook some dinner. Just as soon as I find my shoes......

Mood: Irritable
Background noise: Printers

Comments?