ALARMINGNEWS_1_1.jpg

April 10, 2005

Attn Men: Ignore the NY Times

I am the type of girl that has always had more male than female friends. I get so happy when I click with women, because it's such a rare occurence. It's just so much easier with the men. There are less angles, they tend to be more upfront, and I love confidence, a quality that seems to be underdeveloped in so many women.

That said, it looks like the NY Times will not rest until they turn men into navel-gazing, neurotic lunatics just like so much writing has made many women into retarded versions of Bridget Jones. Take this piece, about 'man-dates'. In it, the Times finds the biggest loser guys on the planet and gets them to talk about the awkwardness of hanging out alone with one of their friends in a setting not involving sports. Apparently, two men going to a museum or to dinner together is 'gay'.

The Times admits that 'man date' isn't a term anyone normal would ever use: 'Although "man date" is a coinage invented for this article, appearing nowhere in the literature of male bonding (or of homosexual panic), the 30 to 40 straight men interviewed, from their 20's to their 50's, living in cities across the country, instantly recognized the peculiar ritual even if they had not consciously examined its dos and don'ts.' The piece is cringe-worthy as when they tell an interview subject that his friend would like alone time with him and doesn't like that he pre-empts their 'man-date' by bring along other men. "If I had known he wanted to spend one-on-one time, I would have," Mr. Freimann explained, adding that group dinners had simply seemed "more fun."

Like I said, I spend a lot of time with straight men. Recently, two of them went to see Christo's 'The Gates' together. That's right. Two straight men went for a walk in Central Park to look at odd art and neither had a gender dysphoric breakdown because of it. My men friends go out to dinner together, hang out on the couch and watch movies, go out drinking and not sit at the bar and generally just don't overthink their experience with their friends. Because, really, if they wanted to overanalyze everything they'd get girlfriends and well, who wants that?

Posted by Karol at April 10, 2005 01:45 PM | TrackBack
Technorati Tags:
Comments

And now it's all right. It's OK.
And you may look the other way.
We can try to understand
the New York Times' effect on man.

Sorry. Could not resist.

Posted by: Von Bek at April 10, 2005 02:00 PM

Here is the my Rule on Man Dates.

It is ok to go on a man date as long as both of us are wearing crummy-looking clothes.

Posted by: Jake at April 10, 2005 03:24 PM

Shocking.

I'm shocked that the New York times would print such drivel.

I'm shocked that anyone is that insecure.

And I pity the ment that they interviewed, they clearly are far too concerned with all the wrong things.

Posted by: Kearns at April 10, 2005 06:43 PM

"Man-date"? Oh, that's delicious.

Next article: Boxing will be re-named "Fisting."

Posted by: ace at April 10, 2005 07:23 PM

Stupidist Article Ever,
I hang out one-on-one with male friends all the time, and would never think twice about going to see art, or going to a nice restaurant. I'm not suggesting that I represent everyone, BUT, to those guys they interviewed, yes, really really embarrasing.

Posted by: J. Nathan at April 11, 2005 09:43 AM

My last man date was when I shot a friends gun to see if i like it, he paid for the rental of the lane at the gun range and i paid for my ammo. Does that mean we went dutch?

Does that count?

Posted by: cube at April 11, 2005 10:17 AM

uch, this article really bugs me. next they'll say guys can't shop without worrying about seeming gay. you know what's gay? when guys worry about looking gay.

Posted by: Jessica at April 11, 2005 12:25 PM

sadly, kearns, nytimes has been known to print worse drivel for awhile now. their reporting has gone quite downhill.. what can you expect from a paper that doesn't require its foreign correspondents to speak the language of the country they're in? my expectations have always been low.

Posted by: writersbloc gal at April 11, 2005 01:33 PM

Hmmm, perhaps, Karol, and call me crazy, but you like hanging out with men because, unlike women, we don't make up ludicrous arbitrary rules about what can be said and done when hanging out (or, if you will, on man-dates).

Just a thought.

Posted by: ken at April 11, 2005 03:30 PM

A great take on the article.

Posted by: ugarte at April 11, 2005 04:10 PM

Wrong, Ken. Men have plenty of rules, they're just understood, no discussion needed. That's my style too.

Posted by: Karol at April 11, 2005 05:11 PM

Yeah, that NYT article made my hair hurt too. The link posted above by Ugarte is dead on.

Posted by: bobm at April 11, 2005 09:11 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?