hackthis_archive (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
hackthis_archive) wrote2004-01-27 02:31 pm
hackthis_archive) wrote2004-01-27 02:31 pm
Don’t be shallow, part III
Pursuant to the last two entries, I would like to point out that at no time have I meant to insinuate that one can only be a Man if one wears suits, is in possession of a white-collar job and drives a bloody Volvo.
“Men” are not required to own more than one button-down shirt or have more than three pairs of dress shoes. Men can live in bloody shacks, kill their own food, and wear jeans 365 days of the year (Viggo) or never wear shoes (Peter) and look gorgeous in skirts (you name it). They don’t have to own Brioni or Ferragamo. Messieurs Levi and Taylor work just fine. Saying you must wear a suit to be a Man is like saying you must wear stockings to be a Woman: it’s fucking ludicrous.
Clothing does not make the man; material possessions do not make the man. A man is made up the things he does and the way he carries himself. Men are made up of deeds and actions, and preferably putting the toilet seat down. I have never meant to imply otherwise, and my apologies if anyone thought I had.
*No offense to the Volvo owners out there, either, I know you all have cars of bloody steel. Volvos are like the Cher of cars – completely indestructible, in the good way.
-Conversation Terminated-
“Men” are not required to own more than one button-down shirt or have more than three pairs of dress shoes. Men can live in bloody shacks, kill their own food, and wear jeans 365 days of the year (Viggo) or never wear shoes (Peter) and look gorgeous in skirts (you name it). They don’t have to own Brioni or Ferragamo. Messieurs Levi and Taylor work just fine. Saying you must wear a suit to be a Man is like saying you must wear stockings to be a Woman: it’s fucking ludicrous.
Clothing does not make the man; material possessions do not make the man. A man is made up the things he does and the way he carries himself. Men are made up of deeds and actions, and preferably putting the toilet seat down. I have never meant to imply otherwise, and my apologies if anyone thought I had.
*No offense to the Volvo owners out there, either, I know you all have cars of bloody steel. Volvos are like the Cher of cars – completely indestructible, in the good way.
-Conversation Terminated-
no subject
I know - I'm questioning one of the basic tenets of womanhood, and will probably be burned in effigy for questioning this, but ...
I never understood this one. When I want the lid up, and it isn't up, I lift it. When I want it down, and it is up, I lower it. Why do women find this so challenging - it's not rocket science. And if I get up in the middle of the night to pee in the dark bathroom (I don't like to turn on the light because - BRIGHT LIGHT), I *sit down* on the toilet - and I manage to tell by touch if the seat is up or down and lower the seat before I sit down if it is needed.
no subject
I'm not planning on burning any effigies today, it's too cold out. IMO, the status of the toilet seat really depends on the home in which it resides. In a female apartment, the seat tends to be down, thus you expect it to find it down at three in the morning when you're scrabbling around in the dark. To find otherwise can cause serious trouble. However, in a male apartment, the seat tends to be up, so *I* tend to expect to find it up at the same three am. To find it otherwise is nice, but not expected.
no subject