Skip to main content


Frankly, as a YouPorn masturbator, I was pretty offended by this. (By the way, you can also hit me up on Chatroulette.) What's more, the last part kind of makes him sound like serial killer: "My local life is clean. I am more focused than they are. Stronger and better suited to what is near me -- my family, my wife, my job." It almost feels like his next sentence could easily be, "No one would ever dream of looking in my shed."

But the other weird part about this is that he says, "you don't fight men over stuff like this" -- yet he goes and does just that. He fights with men (with me) about it, he just does so in flaccid anonymity.

[. . .]

First of all, I would never, never describe making love to my wife as "sweet." There is actually a lot of grunting, if you must know.

[. . .]

This is not a cheating piece, this is a revenge piece; society isn't nice with all its fancy expectations for little Prince Anonymous, so I will treat my wife passive aggressively -- no, make that cruelly -- and I'll do so in complete anonymity (just like this article). I will use my wife and these women to get back at the big bad modern world that doesn't appreciate me. Performance reviews, training, 401K, too much work, deadening career, flawed and antiquated apparatus of marriage.

This is not a cheating piece. It's more of this Nouvelle American Man Poor Me bullshit. This is just a retread article by a guy with no sense of humor about himself, who is too soft to take any real responsibility in his life. Don't like your boring job? Quit, and learn how to live with less, or find something that interests you more. Living too long? Get a heroin problem. Don't like being married? Don't get married. Or man up and get a divorce. Fix just one aspect of your miserable life and stop giving me shit about masturbating to YouPorn. Don't act like some jaded character resigned to his fate, don't be an anonymous guru who purports to have some deep insight into what men really think, because ultimately, while there are a bunch of guys over the age of 30 who think and act like this, most of us got over this angsty stuff a long time ago. The only thing this particular anonymous has any insight into is the way spoiled little boys think. (Aaron Traister, “Explaining Tiger Woods and Jesse James, badly,” Salon, 19 March 2010)


When we sense that Morgana, not Arthur, rules the realm, the most obnoxious -- for sensing themselves so obnoxiously-backed/empowered -- are the Mordreds of the world, those who have offered up their scrotums and their souls to their mother-wives.

Why does Aaron so often repeat that he's a YouPorn watcher -- put this fact before us, not so much as if he was owning-up to his clownishness, but as if he was muscling his balls before our face? Because it posits him the teen boy whose bathroom grunts are to be understood by mom as but natural -- that "that's what little boys do" -- not someone who is contesting her centrality of interest to, her ownership over, him. His juvenile grunts show he has retreated away from any claim to adult self-possession; he becomes the adolescent who proves daily in his ostensible adulthood that he will never in fact defy or move on.

This is a rewarding but also humiliating place to be. You do feel some wife-revenge in his making clear "we're up to grunting, not just petting" -- a way of covering with the mutual his intention we know how daily HE makes HER grunt -- but it is well diverted toward some other intention, toward the primary "out" for his revenge. For in the age of Morgana, the wife-fidelitous YouPorner feels -- and actually can -- make mince-meat of any ranging 'squire, and so frustration finds release primarily in OUR carnage. He needn't even argue or write well: it's enough for him to show off his branding for us to know that our God, our Lady, has ordained the day for him.

Link: Explaining Tiger Woods and Jesse James, badly (Salon)


Popular posts from this blog

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …