I don’t tend to make judgments about men by their appearance, but when there’s a widespread trend in any given place – that is, they all share something in common – I pay attention. Lately, Heartiste has been pointing out the blatant effeminacy of the elite young punditry. He has a point. I can’t think of any mainstream media pundits under the age of 40 who come off as genuinely masculine.
Take Chris Hayes for example. His wife looks like she could bench press more than he can:
As far as I can tell, this is what you get when academia and media become dominated by feminine sensibilities. Female teachers often do not – cannot – handle typical boys and young men. The males who thrive in this environment are physically passive mama’s boys who are never intimidating. From a female perspective, this may seem quite alright: keep the men who work in their company nice, tame and obedient. They want dogs rather than wolves as peers.
However, for men, this can be problematic. These types, when ambitious, tend to harbor a genuine hatred toward more typically masculine males, so they embrace politics and stances that are directly opposed to your average guy’s interests. It explains a lot of their liberalism and contempt for the average man. I wonder whether the courtiers in late 18th century France weren’t pretty much the same.
