Tuesday, December 01, 2009


I don't know if it's because The Singularity still hasn't arrived or what, but Putz is bizarrely angry at Hanna Rosin's fact-based assertion that the number of husband-abusers is grossly overstated. He's also terribly miffed that Rosin dared write that "If Tiger [Woods] had been chasing down his wife with a golf club and she had shown up with bruises, even if she had cheated with, say, K-fed, we would be a lot less ambivalent and complacent.”

That’s probably correct, for certain values of the word “we,” but why is that, exactly? Cheating men deserve to be beaten, even with weapons, while cheating women do not?

Or could it be, you know, sexism? But that’s not possible, because Hanna Rosin can’t be sexist, and neither can those who agree with her. If you’re Hanna Rosin, “sexist” is a name you call other people. You know, bad people who believe in stereotypes and stuff.

Yabbers. The one thing Putz has always had going for him is brevity. This was a smart move; whenever he deigns to write anything beyond, heh, indeed or read the whole thing, he becomes magnificently incoherent.

No comments: