Almost Neanderthal, Charles Blow says!

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 24, 2024

Perhaps he should drop that first word: Candidate Trump is playing for the masculine vote, Charles Blow writes today in the New York Times.

We're intrigued by the following passage, which comes near the start of Blow's column. That said, we'll guess that he's understating the emotional power of the gender-based revolt underway—a revolt which comes from way back when but also from way down below:

Why Trump’s Closing Argument Is Full of ‘Locker Room Talk’

[...]

For months, Trump has been engaged in a foulmouthed assault on Vice President Kamala Harris, reposting lewd comments about her on social media, reportedly referring to her with an expletive behind closed doors and demeaning her as “stupid.”

Last week at a rally, he said, “We can’t stand you, you’re a shit vice president,” shortly after sharing an admiring anecdote about the size of the late golfer Arnold Palmer’s penis.

We’ve heard this kind of talk from Trump before. In 2016, responding to a dig from Marco Rubio, he said, “He referred to my hands: ‘If they’re small, something else must be small.’ I guarantee you there’s no problem.”

This all speaks to a toxic masculinity in which the definition of what it means to be a man is reduced to the size of a sex organ. There’s an almost Neanderthal quality to it, a primal call to what Trump seems to perceive as the base nature of men.

There’s an almost Neanderthal quality to this? 

Based on some of what we've been seeing on the grisly Fox News Channel, we'll suggest that Blow might went to lose the word "almost." Beyond that, we'll suggest that he might want to double down on that other key word: "primal."

The gender pushback has struck us as very angry and highly primal on the ugly Fox News show Gutfeld! 

As we've recently noted, the program's termagant-adjacent flyweight host has been trashing Candidate Harris as a drunk and as something perhaps resembling a wh*re. As far as we know, he hasn't used that second term yet, but the insinuation has been constant—and during this very week, he has begun to refer to her simply as "that broad."

In what decade—in what century—does this undergrown little guy live? 

Greg Gutfeld seems to be living in some other era—and he seems to be incel-angry about the way These Liberal Women Today won't get off his lawn. Pathetically, he seems to have found a string of D-list comedians and other flyweights who are happy to promote his vision about the unacceptably overweight liberal women he finds all around himself, but also about the troubling woman he now describes as "that broad."

The incel-based pushback seems remarkably strong—and yes, we'd call it primal. Just a guess:

Presumably, this sort of thing is very much bred in the bone. It's stunning to see the fervor with which it's being acted out on this demented primetime show as the women of Fox look on.

Speaking about this with a friend, we thought back to Eyes Wide Shut (1999), Stanley Kubrick's final film. If memory serves, the film wasn't all that well received in real time—the leading authority offers a somewhat different report—but critical judgment has apparently improved given the passage of time.

We can't quite remember the shape of the plot, but the whole thing turns on the discovery of a throwback, sex-based secret society operating in a mansion somewhat on Long Island. We'll only say that the rituals of this secret society involve a highly primal desire to return to highly Neanderthal gender roles, though some such statement may be unfair to the actual Neanderthals who once peopled parts of the earth.

The boys of Gutfeld! are very angry and they want their supremacy back. The executive who opens this garbage can every night and turns these angry children loose is, of course, Suzanne Scott, CEO of Fox News.

An angry revolt is underway from below. In major ways, we Blues have spent the past sixty years developing ways to earn our way out. (More on that next week.) 

In other ways, the world is dealing with the primal desires of undergrown children, one of whom comes from a sunny land and never quite seemed to grow up.

We'll guess that Blow should focus on that one word—"primal." An angry revolt is underway from below. In the hands of the Fox Channel's angry lost boys, it tracks back before the dawn of time, and it has an amoeba vibe.

Candidate Harris is now "this broad," the program's pathetic host says. For the record, Suzanne Scott is the corporate stooge who puts this creep on the air.

58 comments:

  1. There’s an almost Neanderthal quality to this?

    The original author is correct. Trump's behavior is almost Neanderthal. It falls a bit short of the eloquence and refinement one would expect of the typical Neanderthal. But almost there!

    ReplyDelete
  2. "bred in the bone" means genetic, innate, native to our species

    Somerby says:

    "Presumably, this sort of thing is very much bred in the bone. It's stunning to see the fervor with which it's being acted out on this demented primetime show as the women of Fox look on."

    It is NOT natural, genetic, innate, inherent to being male for men to be disrespectful of women. Across cultures and time, women have not been treated badly and subordinated to men. The way a scientists tests an assertion of innateness is to do cross-cultural comparisons, to see whether a trait or propensity arises in early childhood or develops with exposure to culture, to think about what survival function that trait might hold for people exhibiting a behavior. Hatred and mistreatment of women meets none of those criteria for being "bred in the bone" as Somerby asserts.

    Further, the fact that the women on Fox shows might not object to mistreatment of other women, does not condone that treatment. It means that the women are not willing to sacrifice their own careers to defend other women (not present) who are being trashed by comedians making jokes or political statements. It is not their job to defend Harris or women in general, and there is no reason why they should be expected to stick their necks out. The bad behavior rests squarely with Gutfeld and the others exhibiting it, not with women bystanders who may or may not be victims of their hate speech. Somerby seeks to make them complicit, but they are not, unless they engage in the same behavior themselves.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. '"Bred in the bone" is an adjective that means something is established or instilled AS IF by heredity, or is deeply committed or resolved.'

      Grow up.

      Delete
    2. If they meant “as if” they’d say that. Bred in the bone means hereditary. Have you never talked to a white supremacist?

      Delete
  3. Somerby is back to his “bad genes” nonsense, ignoring the fact that humans are innately egalitarian, in particular with respect to gender.

    There’s nothing Neanderthal nor primal about Gutfeld, such a person emerges from a society overly obsessed with competition and commodification.

    The Washington Post has an analysis out today that demonstrates that Harris has much more broad support for her policies than Trump, with most of her policies receiving above 50% while most of Trump’s getting below 50%.

    Even a significant portion of Republican voters support Harris’ policies over Trump’s.

    Furthermore, some of the Harris policies Republicans support, they falsely attribute to Trump.

    All of this is a clear indication Republicans do not actually believe or buy into MAGA nonsense; instead, their support for Trump is emotional, a way of dealing with their discomfort at having their dominance-oriented personality traits challenged.

    It is also a clear indication that there’s little point to expending effort into persuasion, into finding voters that might switch their votes, and instead the focus should be on motivating turn out.

    Americans generally support progressive policies, but a little under half are sadly unable to get past their emotional issues.

    Somerby has nothing to say about the real issues with media and discourse, preferring instead to wander about in his manufactured field of dreams.


    https://youtu.be/WrITHtmAqv0?si=zO0x71QhXMm51DZb

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Although "humans are innately egalitarian," Republicans have "dominance-oriented personality traits."

      Are you contradicting yourself, or is it that you do you not consider Republicans to be human?

      Delete
    2. Hilarious how easily befuddled you are.

      Delete
    3. You left out the part about Republican trauma.

      Delete
  4. Calling abusive sex roles "neanderthal" does not justify them. We don't know what prehistoric sex roles were like. The scene in Eyes Wide Shut depicts a spectrum of sex play including some dominance and submissive roles that are not necessarily gender-based. Men who are masochists frequently seek women to abuse them, which is a role reversal of Somerby's so-called neanderthal roles. Some men get off on that. Calling that throwback implies that it was widespread in the past, when we do not know that is true and in fact historians believe it was not.

    Why drag in this movie that was apparently not popular when released, does not speak directly to anything being discussed today, and is ahistorical? Has Somerby seen no more relevant films? Why return to inappropriate metaphors and images drawn from irrelevant books, songs, poems, films, the way Somerby does? It makes no sense at all. Deviant sex play is not a metaphor for male-female relationships in everyday life, now or in the past, and it certainly has nothing at all to do with why Gutfeld and his associates want to keep a woman from becoming president, particularly this woman.

    This comes across to me as Somerby pretending to discuss gender and sexual relations when he has no knowledge to draw upon. It is like Trump trying to talk about electricity.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "We'll guess that Blow should focus on that one word—"primal." An angry revolt is underway from below. In the hands of the Fox Channel's angry lost boys, it tracks back before the dawn of time, and it has an amoeba vibe."

    Somerby really needs to explain what he means by all of this. First, what does "from below" mean? Is he talking about the subconscious, the way Freud would? Is he talking about the lower classes in terms of SES (socio-economic status)? Does he think women are below men, so is he referring to women's rights and their efforts to escape subjugation?

    When Somerby says this tracks back to before the dawn of time, he hints at this being built in, as when he calls Gutfeld's anger "primal" and refers to Neanderthals, but that doesn't fit what is going on between men and women at all. Women have at times been rulers of tribes, at other times and places, goddesses and healers, keepers of wisdom, in some cultures they have been warriors and hunters alongside men, in other places and times (such as Victorian England) they were protected, revered as producers of children, but also denied participation in male culture, as slaves women have done hard labor alongside men without regard for their sex, in many cultures individual women have been protected by their tribe members, not allowed to be exploited by men or strangers. So where is the bred in the bone male chauvinism Somerby seems to hint at today? It is a stereotype advanced by some men to excuse their bad behavior. Yet Somerby seems to call it primal as if it were natural, preferred, excused, desirable and not deplorable when men today have behaved badly.

    Men like Weinstein, Epstein, Trump have excused their behavior using their wealth and power, not their manhood. Trump has never been a manly man, despite his fantasies. His youth was coupled with effeminacy, a prettiness (with his button-bow mouth and long eyelashes) associated with girls. His narcissism concerning his hair and makeup are associated with women too. The stereotype is that women, not men, seek to be the center of admiration and attention, courted and flattered. I suspect that it is the confusion engendered by these men's lack of adherence to gender stereotypes that causes them to attack and put down women (the aspects of themselves they seek to deny) while claiming a manliness they just do not project.

    That's why this Dave Bautista video is so on target, not just for Trump but for Gutfeld (who Somerby mocks as short), Carlson, Vance (with his eyeliner eyes and soft body), and others on the right. There is no reason why any of these men should have to conform to he-man stereotypes except that they inflict this expectation on themselves, because they really really really wouldn't want to be despised women.

    https://www.facebook.com/JimmyKimmelLive/videos/trump-gets-his-masculinity-checked-by-the-manliest-avenger-of-all/908280711201065/

    ReplyDelete
  6. Apparently Tim Ball (recently-named disseminator of Putin bullshit) is quitting his podcast to start a family "to spend more time with" and he needs to find a girlfriend first.

    Would that be an incel version of a gender transition?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tim Pool, not Ball.

      Delete
    2. Recall that Thiel funded a Republican dating app (The Right Stuff) because MAGA men cannot find women willing to date them.

      Delete
    3. It’s something an app can’t fix.

      Delete
    4. Appreciate the correction 4:39.

      Delete
  7. "Candidate Harris is now "this broad," the program's pathetic host says. For the record, Suzanne Scott is the corporate stooge who puts this creep on the air."

    Is Somerby again implying that if a woman has anything to do with Gutfeld, then she is responsible for his bad behavior?

    Does it surprise anyone that the mopes on Fox do not have positive feelings toward Kamala Harris? The problem with "broad" is not that it is derogatory, but that it is so gender-specific. Just as the word termagant applies to women (a shrew or nagging woman), so does broad. Singling Harris out for her gender instead of her politics is sexist. That makes the term an insult for all of the women watching Gutfeld, including the female Republicans who otherwise may enjoy his show. They are all lumped together when Gutfeld calls Harris a broad, as an attempt to demean her.

    If Republican women were not dumb as rocks, they would understand that gendered insults hurled at Harris affect them too. Just like men should understand that when Somerby applies the name termagant to Gutfeld, he is demeaning all men, by applying to them a gendered term that implies that being like a woman is the greatest insult a man can suffer. Men who apply female descriptors to other men are sexist assholes trying to malign both women and the man they have singled out to call womanly in some trait (and thus not a bro and maybe even suspect in his heterosexuality).

    Somerby's pretense in sticking up for women being called broads is hypocritcal when he calls Gutfeld a termagant. But Somerby doesn't care what women are called. He is using a faux feminist outrage to criticize Gutfeld, but in such a way that he comes across sounding silly, and may not actually be against what Gutfeld does at all, given the way he tries to shift the blame to this Suzanne Scott person.

    And look how daintily Somerby puts that asterisk back in the word "whore" asking whether anyone has actually called Harris that lately (as if hoe or ho were not bad enough). Somerby will be relieved to know that "broad" means "whore" since it refers to a promiscuous woman, although whore also includes being paid some money.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Is Somerby again implying that if a woman has anything to do with Gutfeld, then she is responsible for his bad behavior?"

      No.

      Delete
    2. "If Republican women were not dumb as rocks"

      If you weren't dumb as a rock, you would understand that calling scores of millions of women "dumb as rocks" is something only a prejudiced bigot could say.

      Delete
    3. Dumb As Rocks, Like you

      Delete
    4. PP,
      What do you know?
      You are the person who believes there really is a Republican voter who cares about something other than bigotry and white supremacy, based on the fact that if there wasn't, it would make you feel bad.

      Delete
  8. Going back as far as Harry Truman in 1948 Democrats won elections by crudely calling their opponents Fascists or Hitler. Now the Dems are losing to an opponent just as crude as they are. Poetic justice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Self-inflicted injuryOctober 24, 2024 at 5:11 PM

      The problem with this kind of "justice" is that it hurts all of us, because Trump is not going to be good for our country.

      Delete
    2. Answer: Day One.
      Question: When will I help push the Jews who voted for Trump into cattle cars?

      Delete
    3. Hitler had some good ideas.
      But then he was kept from finishing the job by the Allies, who shutdown the concentration camps.

      Delete
    4. 5:15,
      Best thing to happen in this country, since the Right tried to own liberals by responding to BLM with “All Lives Matter”, and South and Central American refugees heard them, and thought they were serious.

      Delete
    5. The thing is, now it is Republicans who worked under Trump calling him a fascist, Dickhead in Cal.

      General Eisenhower: nope, the man who defeated Hitler, no Dickhead, we never called him a fascist.

      Nixon: not the first time he ran as a red baiter, but later he, Halderman and Ehrlichman sure as hell came close to meeting the definition.

      Goldwater: just a crazy red baiter a little too radical for most of America, but not for you and the other John Birchers, David

      Reagan, who treasonously dealt with Iran and gave us Iran/Contra - yep



      Delete
    6. "Now the Dems are losing to an opponent just as crude as they are."

      A statement like this, in what is an obviously too-close-to-call election, is made to set up the whining and coup-making to follow if Trump loses.

      This is something fascists do.

      Delete
    7. As I predicted, Dickhead in Cal will be more and more bitchy the closer we get to the election.

      Delete
    8. Yes, @6:12 the election is too close to call for sure, things look rosy for Trump. Polls show Trump is leading in every single battleground state. https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/president/2024/battleground-states

      And, Harris is barely ahead in total vote. Her lead is 0.2%. Hillary won the total vote by 2.1% and still lost the election.https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-harris

      Delete
    9. Why is Trump even running, David? I thought he actually won in 2020, at least according to him. If he loses this time, will he accept it?

      Delete
    10. Good question, @8:28. Suppose Trump loses despite leading in the final polls, how will he and supporters react?

      Delete
    11. I was asking you, David. Don’t we already know what he and his goons did in 2020? Not just the insurrectionists at the Capitol, but the officials around the country with their fake electors.

      Delete
    12. Trump supporters exist by willfully ignoring any facts that do not comport with their narrative. The fact that many prominent Republicans and prior members of Trump's regime have called him a wannabe dictator and fascist is not the blame of Democrats. I cannot recall a presidential candidate with so many in his own party, and so many who knew him well from their work with him, who denounce him as unfit to preside over this country. DIC apparently knows better, just as he knows that Putin's election propaganda for Trump is because Trump is the politician who will stand up to him. Makes perfect sense. Now we see that Musk has had private conversations with Putin for the last 2 years, another fact to be willfully ignored as inconsequential by the Trump cult. Maybe the three of them can do conference calls to line up their future plans for this country.

      Delete
    13. Yes, I do know better, because Trump actually was President, and he didn't do any fascistic actions. Nor did his policies favor Putin. OTOH Biden's policies strongly favored Iran. I find that incomprehensible.

      Should you believe some bitter former Trump subordinates or you own eyes? iI vote for the latter.

      Delete
    14. It's easy to believe your own eyes when you avert them from anything disagreeable with your narrative. I will take the opinions of multiple highly decorated generals and others who worked closely with Trump over an octogenarian whose mental acuity commonly results in him posting comments with links that contradict them. Attempting to subvert an election and inciting an insurrection on January 6, 2020 don't qualify as the acts of a would be fascist in your special world.

      Delete
    15. he didn't do any fascistic actions.

      Why was he impeached twice, Dic?

      Delete
    16. The three campaigns of misinformation staged by Putin in favor of Trump being elected says this: in 2016, 2020 , and now, Putin feared the election of Trump’s adversaries more than he feared Trump. Possibly in 2016 he saw Trump as an ally who would threaten to withhold arms from Ukraine. Which he did and was impeached for. Absent transcripts of his private conversations with Putin after he was voted out, not to mention the location and what Trump did with missing documents he stole , you and your cult have no valid argument that counters the one that Trump has shown himself to be an ally of Putin, as in the words genius and brilliant when Putin invaded Ukraine in a war that had been ongoing throughout Trump’s presidency and in which the only public action Trump took was to threaten to aid the Russians in their war.

      Delete
    17. “ Trump actually was President, and he didn't do any fascistic actions.”

      Trying to use corrupt means to stay in power and launching an insurrection against the US were fascistic, David.

      Delete
  9. There is probably a reason why "Neanderthal" is a derogatory term.

    ReplyDelete
  10. From Rawstory:

    "Less than two weeks before voters head to the polls to choose between Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, a concerned group of mental health experts issued a new warning about the former president.

    Operating under "Duty to Warn," 233 mental health professionals signed off on a letter to be published in the New York Times, calling Trump an "imminent catastrophic public danger" to the world should he be re-elected based upon recent evidence on display in his public appearances.

    In the letter, they asserted, the 78-year old Trump "....exhibits behavior that tracks with the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual’s (DSM V) diagnostic criteria for 'narcissistic personality disorder,' 'antisocial personality disorder,' and'“paranoid personality disorder,' all made worse by his intense sadism, which is a symptom of malignant narcissism."

    The letter also notes, "Trump appears to be showing signs of cognitive decline that urgently cry out for a full neurological work-up, including an MRI and neuropsychological testing. These symptoms include: a dramatic decrease in verbal fluency, tangential thinking, diminished vocabulary, overuse of superlatives and filler words, perseveration, confabulation, phonemic paraphasia, semantic paraphasia, confusing people (not just names), as well as exhibiting deteriorating judgment, impulse control, and motor functioning (including a wide-based gait)."

    Calling the evidence of Trump's decline "disqualifying," mental health experts from the group will elaborate on their concerns in a video to be shown on cable TV during the waning days of the campaign which can be seen below or at this link."

    This is something Somerby should be concerned about, but he would apparently prefer to criticize Charles Blow instead.

    https://www.rawstory.com/trump-mental-health-2669474857/?utm_source=superhead

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Looking forward to Bob Somerby criticizing these 233 mental health experts warning us about a Trump Presidency, because they are doing it wrong.

      Delete
    2. Has anyone noticed how few geese are around these days?

      Delete
    3. 233 out of the approximately 2.2 million mental health professionals in America?

      Delete
    4. 11:22: How many of the 2 million have declared Harris unfit?

      Delete
  11. Shut your pie hole.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 4:09. According to you, Somerby is one of the men who share a "denigration of fat women," which is one of the "attitudes he himself has expressed here in the past."

    I think this is false.

    Please correct me with a quote and dated citation if I'm mistaken. Otherwise, please retract. (Oh, and please don't deflect with some long-winded exegesis. Just provide the quote.)

    ReplyDelete
  13. And really, you see this essay as an attack on Blow for being a black gay? You can find racist homophobia anywhere, don't you? Somerby is highlighting Blow's work and he is agreeing with him.

    ReplyDelete
  14. And the attack on Anderson Cooper is on a gay white man, like the endless attacks on Rachel Maddow were on a gay white woman. Somerby ticks all the hate boxes.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Somerby loves to repeat those fat jokes Gutfeld tells against Joy Behar. Like he loves to call Harris a wh*re, like he doesn’t know what the word means without that vowel. Mika’s voice grates on his nerves but Rachel drives him nuts. But Somerby loves women, right?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Now it turns out Musk has been talking regularly with Putin too.

    ReplyDelete
  17. We currently live in the twilight zone. The America we know and love and then there’s Trump’s America full of chaos, delusion, confusion and division. One with promises of bloodshed, dictatorship, where books are banned, black history is a myth, police are killed by rioters undertaking coups, woman are obedient and subservient, tampons are banned, Nelson Mandela is lied about, Hitler is praised, border walls are built and Jan 6th insurrectionists are heroes.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 23 Nobel winning economists have issued a damning statement about Trump's economic agenda, labeling it as far inferior to Harris's, and highly likely to be inflationary. It is time for Trump cultists like DIC to pivot away from any prior blathering about concerns regarding inflation and the national debt. While the best economic minds in the world issue a dire warning about the potentially severe economic impact of another Trump presidency, Trump cultists like DIC conjure up all the will necessary to ignore these geniuses. The Trump cult members know better.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Donald Trump says he is going to be a dictator if he wins in November. He comes from the same Illuminati bloodlines that funded Hitler. His dad was in the Ku Klux Klan. Next week, he plans to use Madison Square Garden to replicate the 1939 Nazi rally held there. Trump attended summer camp with Nazis and there is now reporting he participated in paddle boat races with many of them. And kayaking. Trump once asked John Kelly “Why can't you be like the German generals?” America doesn't want a president who harbors Nazi propaganda. I will be voting for Dr. Jill Stein. I will go to the MAGA death camps with my head held high because I know what I stand for.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Americans are excited that Kamala has pledged to keep all of Biden's policies in place. He opened up opportunity for the middle class, created millions of new jobs, he brought the price of gas down, fought inflation, shrinkflation and package flap. He stemmed the inflow of immigrants from the border and lowered the national debt. Harris will continue this record of success, legalize marijuana for black men and more. The alternative has pledged to round up enemies and charge them with sedition, his jack boot thugs will violently beat anyone who steps out of line, shoplifters will be shot. Women seeking abortions will be shot and killed. He will foment a reign of war, carnage and violent death that will take millions of innocent lives and displace millions more all while stealing billions of dollars from the United States.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 40 out of 44 of his previous cabinet don’t endorse him! They know he’s unfit.

      Delete