why words like 'manorexia' and 'murse' are dangerous

Post Reply New Topic

interesting article that suggests 'masculinised' synonyms for otherwise feminine concepts, like 'metrosexual', 'manorexia' etc are enabling transphobia, homophobia and the concept of binary gender roles.

http://www.rolereboot.org/culture-and-p ... ing-are-da

Let's not forget Coke Zero, which is little more than Diet Coke for boys. It's colloquially known in my circle as, "Coke Hardon."

The author (Drew Bowling) of that article appears to be living in a cocoon reality.

He also provided absolutely zero evidence to his claims. Business targeting specific segments in advertisements to bolster sales? No s**t, Sherlock...

Example: The Danish toy manufacturer Lego was heavily criticized for launching a line of products marketed for girls. Guess what? It's turned out to be a very commercially successful strategy...

Drew Bowling is somewhat surprised, even, that Sideshow Bob from The Simpsons has a Wikipedia entry as long as that of Catherine MacKinnon and Thurgood Marshall. Has it ever occurred to the idiot that most people outside of the US have never even heard of MacKinnon and Marshall, but that The Simpsons has been aired in 70 or more countries?

http://www.webpronews.com/wikipedia-edi ... er-2012-04

Oh, and we can't trust Wikipedia because most of the editors are men. So when you see a bus driving towards you at 50 mph, don't bother stepping out of the way, as the wiki articles on mass and velocity are likely to have been written predominantly by men...

Article is pretty all over the place and the examples probably make more sense in the writer's head than real life. Deodorant and yogurt? The idea that words like 'manorexia', 'murse'(surprised he didn't say the bro), 'manscaping', etc. are some creeping neologism that poses us some great danger is pretty laughable. Has anybody ever heard those terms in anything but a joke? He reads to much into marketing targeted at adolescent young males, it's not targeting you or men at large.

The premise he's working with is false to begin with, masculinity and femininity are not made up. It's a weird contrast when he ties it together with saying there terms are "transgressive", aren't transgendered people the antithesis to the idea that gender roles are completely learned? He assuredly doesn't believe that being homosexual(not that they're are the same thing) is a choice and learned behavior? Go read some prominent feminist viewpoints on the subject.

I read as much of the article as I could stand.
All I have to say is this: Maybe it would be different if there weren't such a drive to emasculate. Attacking normally triggers defending or fortifying.

so where does the concept of the choice of the individual begin and end, pretell?

The gender divergent are attacking nothing. Except maybe the preconceptions and comfort zones of societal conservatives. Homophobia is the straight man's fear that a gay man will treat him the way he wants to treat women.

Who's choices are being threatened?


So why attack someone's comfort zone when all they'll do is defend it more?


I don't know if "phobia" accurately defines the feelings some have toward gays but I'm not going to go into that.

I don't see how either of those are feminine concepts, besides those replacement words just sound stupid. Manorexia? I hope that doesn't become a clinical term. I just don't really see the point males can have anorexia and other disorders that might be more common in females and males can work as nurses or any other profession even if historically or whatever it was more female dominated. No need for special terms for males working in those jobs or having disorders like anorexia.

I don't think I would take it to serious if someone use the term manorexia or murse in conversation.

Howabout "womaspergers", and "womautism"?

Aspergers and autism are more common among males so why not make up a dumb sounding special word for females on the spectrum?

Makes as much (or as little) sense as 'manorexia'.

The choices of those who do not wish to conform to gender binaries.


it is the societal conservatives who are choosing to be offended at having their preconceptions challenged. Its their problem. They have the power to choose their views, those of gender ambiguity cannot change their feelings. The onus should be on the conservative cis-gendered to alter their attitudes.


those feelings have no rational basis, so phobia has it covered pretty well.

You're using some terms I'm not super familiar with so forgive me if I misinterpret them but I assume you believe that gender roles are learn behavior and human constructs right? How do you reconcile that with transgendered people who you believe are born that way?(which I agree with as well)

Who says they have to conform?



Don't hold your breath on me changing my attitude..
Besides, above you go on about one side forcing it's views on the other then condone it when your side does it.
Hypocritical?

Do they?

Try holding the opinion that homosexuality is wrong, or that transsexuals should be gassed, or that Palestine has no right to exist.

Gonna be a lot of manstruating on this thread.

I've never heard of those two people, but I've definitely heard of The Simpsons!

I reached those views by choosing to listen to the intellectually honest and empirical cases behind them. If I had chosen to ignore, it would easilly have arrived at the contrary view. I mantain its still a matter of choice.