Jump to content

Every Day is Man Day


Recommended Posts

This would've gone in the "Humor" section of the board's earlier iteration. I post it here, in good humor.

The latest from Labash includes an interesting, umm, application of Ephesians:

It was a day, they declared, to eat a steak, to "blow something up, shoot some animal, punch your buddy in the face for no reason" and watch Rocky movies all day, never minding that a real man would never enjoy Rocky III. That scene with Rocky and Apollo Creed skipping around in the ocean, holding each other in their short-shorts after a particularly rigorous workout--that's about as manly as being a groupie at a John Mayer concert.

Their supporters, however, were not deterred. Testimonials poured in of a day well spent. Men boasted of not bathing, of scratching unholy areas, of showing a pressure washer who's boss, of firing automatic weapons, blowing up prairie dogs, eating large quantities of meat without utensils, and greeting friends "with firm handshakes, or rather, MANdshakes."

It made me feel sorry for them. It's not that I don't celebrate my own Man Day every day by tending to my desires, instead of to those of the women and children. Nor do I consider myself some paragon of manhood--though by today's effeminized-man standards, I might actually qualify: I can drive a stick shift, work a chainsaw, enjoy relieving myself outside, and would never think of getting a vasectomy. (It's not that I wouldn't do anything for my wife--I love her more than life itself. But I don't want to be unfair to my future trophy wife. What if she wants kids?) ...

My wife is a quasi-feminist, believing women should vote and drive and stuff. She's also a pretty fair Bible scholar, assuring me that I'm cynically wrenching a phrase out of context in un-Christian fashion, then twisting it into a rhetorical balloon animal to try to score cheap points when I'm getting crushed in an argument.

She's probably right. But that hardly matters. I just say, "Read Ephesians" and run like hell.

Edited by Christian

"What matters are movies, not awards; experiences, not celebrations; the subjective power of individual critical points of view, not the declamatory compromises of consensus." - Richard Brody, "Godard's Surprise Win Is a Victory for Independent Cinema," The New Yorker

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard Mrs. Labash's argument before. "When you love like Jesus Christ, maybe I'll consider submission." I tell ya'. Once you teach 'em to read.... but seriously, I've been having some decidedly un-Protestant discussions with a friend or two at church. Is this what Rome meant in objecting to vernacular Bible translations back in the day?

"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Y'all don't want to go there :)

Edited by BethR

There is this difference between the growth of some human beings and that of others: in the one case it is a continuous dying, in the other a continuous resurrection. (George MacDonald, The Princess and Curdie)

Isn't narrative structure enough of an ideology for art? (Greg Wright)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Um. What?! I didn't say nothin'.

"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...