Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  MEN ARE DOGS

Focus On The Family Provides A Great Reason To Be Lesbian

Loneliness strikes at the heart of both husbands and wives, but tends to plunge deeper into the emotional expanse of women. This is one reason why wives are seduced by “emo-porn,” virtual infidelity that is more emotionally satisfying before it physically pleases. But like salt water, it creates a worsening thirst. With emo-porn, fantasy men perform stunningly between the sheets of conversation, emotional understanding, and emotional dexterity. Most mortal men cannot deliver such behavior, the way men do in soap operas and romance novels. Just as wives rightly complain when compared to the artificially created women of Internet porn, men should complain when compared to the artificial men of daytime television. Interesting, isn’t it, how they have such exciting jobs—no Joe The Plumbers. In the real world where real men burn through a lot of emotional battery life to make a real living, being expected to behave like men who don’t exist is more than wrong. It’s cruel.

- Paul Coughlin of the anti-gay group Focus on the Family explaining to women why they shouldn’t get married to men or read anything depicting men treating women well on a consistent basis, just in case you were considering it.

Image via comedy_nose

By:           Daniel Villarreal
On:           Sep 2, 2011
Tagged: , , ,

  • 19 Comments
    • DavyJones
      DavyJones

      Straight women watch Emo-porn?!?!? Oh, he’s talking about romance novels and soap operas…. that’s much less interesting…

      Sep 2, 2011 at 5:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Skeloric
      Skeloric

      Still, there is an interesting parallel.
      There is a common thread to women presented in straight porn — at least according to those straight men I know who feel it is important to go on and on about such matters — is that the women exist solely for the man’s physical pleasure.
      The straight porn even has a funneling effect so to speak, the woman goes from a relatively wholesome “girl next door” stylings all the way to a tattoo-riddled “cumdumpster” whore.
      Most women in straight porn go through a complete process of starting tame all the way to bizarre extremes.
      Men in romance novels go through a reversal of the process that women in straight porn go through.
      At first he might be a bit rough and edgy but at the end, he is almost entirely non-sentient as his whole existence is to cater to HER emotional needs while having no needs of his own.
      While they draw their own distorted conclusions, the actual analysis of the romance novel is not wrong.

      Sep 2, 2011 at 6:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • slanty
      slanty

      “Just as wives rightly complain when compared to the artificially created women of Internet porn, men should complain when compared to the artificial men of daytime television.”

      I don’t agree with that. Women have a right to expect men to be emotionally deep.

      Sep 2, 2011 at 6:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Weird
      Weird

      Weird. I’m sure this person is a vile shit I’d love to mow down with my car, but strangely, I kinda think there’s a point here. Men are scientifically very visually sexual animals, so it’s no surprise that they are into the superficial appearance of women. Women seemed to be wired a bit differently and so their fantasies take a different form. But does this mean that his fantasies are bad and hers aren’t? Again, I have to kinda agree with this. Weird. Still gonna mow him down though. I’m sure Hitler probably had an insight or two as well. I hear he painted…

      Sep 2, 2011 at 7:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Thomas Maguire
      Thomas Maguire

      COOL STORY, BRO!!

      Sep 2, 2011 at 8:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jimmy Fury
      Jimmy Fury

      I can’t take anything that includes the term “emo-porn” seriously. Especially not when it’s said multiple times.

      Unless they’re talking about sad twinks with flat ironed black hair they need to find different terminology.

      Sep 2, 2011 at 9:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Riker
      Riker

      @Weird: Hitler painted, yes, but he never made any points with his artwork. He painted buildings, which he did fairly well, but it couldn’t really be called art. Have you ever seen them? Completely awful. No sense of composition, emotion, subject, or any sort of meaning besides “ooh look, a pretty building”.

      Sep 3, 2011 at 12:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pierre
      Pierre

      “Focus on the Family” is a comical contradiction. Wonder how they expect people to take them seriously when it is so easy to make fun of them. And I have done so many times!

      Sep 3, 2011 at 2:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      Me thinks the writer at Focus on Profits is having problems living up to his wife’s expectations. And want’s to blame it on someone else.

      Sep 3, 2011 at 10:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      Really? See, I suspect that the average guy is far more capable of having a conversation with emotional content than the average woman is capable of being an ass-to-mouth gokkun bukkake slut.

      Sep 3, 2011 at 11:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pradeep
      Pradeep

      Life is so difficult for a White upper-middleclass straight man who hates everyone who isn’t exactly like him. Not only does he have to spend his life being a moral warrior and preaching hate to those who don’t share his exact same values in every way, he also has to muster up the energy at the end of the day to pretend to respect his wife’s emotions. Ugh, he is so oppressed! We should start a charity fund.

      Sep 3, 2011 at 4:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AndyKraken
      AndyKraken

      Those people are absurd! Focus on the Family needs to be swallowed by the earth. I might be tempted to believe in god if zie started swallowing Christians.

      My momma reads those books. I theorize it is because she is miserable being stuck in a perpetually unsatisfying world of being submissive to her male “partner”. Maybe thats why people read those books. Because the Christian model is oppressive and depressing.

      Sep 3, 2011 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      @Pradeep:

      Beautiful.

      Sep 3, 2011 at 7:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tomtom
      tomtom

      Way i see it, if this guy doesn’t care about giving emotional support to his wife, he just shouldn’t have married her in the first place?? In fact maybe he could be a more attentive husband rather than writing this stupid article? but i’m probably just too emotionally demanding, after all i have watched a lot of emo-porn :P

      Sep 4, 2011 at 9:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      *grunt* Feed me, woman–and get me a beer. That’s all the emo-porn you’re getting out of me tonight. *fart*

      Sep 5, 2011 at 11:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Syl
      Syl

      @ Skeloric: Good points.

      “In the real world where real men burn through a lot of emotional battery life to make a real living,”

      What, women working 9-5 jobs aren’t as emotional or emotionally needy as those who stay at home? Would a woman who works not want to talk about her relationship or feelings? And men can’t express their emotional needs and expectations or enjoy pillow talk just because they have a job?

      I think Mr. Coughlin made a keen observation, but not the one he intended:

      Gender roles fuck up both sexes, and straights as well as queers. Men are *discouraged* from being emotional and sympathetic, and encouraged to be aggressive, sex-hungry, unrefined (theater, the arts, all are girly, gay, boring, unmanly, or all of the above), lone cowboys who don’t need nobody’s help (turn on your TV and you’ll see such a man in under five minutes). Women, meanwhile, are discouraged from being sexual (in ways that men find threatening, be it with another woman or by not being “owned” by any single man), being aggressive, stoic, or independent. They can handle demanding 9-5 jobs and be just as emotional and emotionally needy as always,

      In reality, there all types in both genders, and the best couples, regardless of the sexes of the partners, possess an understanding, if not also similarity in personality type and superficial interests (it’s easier to understand what you know). Rigid gender roles inhibit this: even if the guy and girl are perfectly matched and would be, in some ideal world, a perfect couple, the woman can’t get over her religiously and culturally-imposed hangups over sex, and the man doesn’t have any experience catering to the emotional needs of another person, or how to open up to another person who wants to help him with his. Both people are made to be people that they are not, and, therefore, royally fucked up in the head, all to conform with arbitrary definitions of what a man or a woman should be! (And because they’re fucked up in very different ways, they’re running on incompatible programming!)

      Sep 5, 2011 at 10:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • huanyingas
      huanyingas

      ===== { w w w }{better—–wholesaler }{ us } =======

      welcome to this website—-free ship ping accept pay pal—-

      we provide all kinds of high quality shoes and the other things

      if you are interested in it don’t hesitate to search our website

      hoping you can have a good shop ping experience

      — — (w w w ) ( cabikini ) ( c o m ) — —- –

      Sep 6, 2011 at 3:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mav
      Mav

      This is why God made butch lesbians – all of the chivalry and masculinity, none of the misogyny and societal pressure that accompanies being the “little woman” of a straight guy.

      “A butch is someone who has taken on the best gendered characteristics of both woman and man, left a lot of stuff born of misogyny and heterosexism behind, and walked forward into the world without apology.” – S. Bear Bergman

      (And before anyone gets ready with their OMGtherearechauvinistbutchestoo!!! spiel, be aware that I’m being slightly facetious here.)

      Sep 6, 2011 at 11:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • am
      am

      I’ve never understood why people try to compare straight male porn to romance novels. The only women I’ve ever met who read romance novels like the one featured above are generally over 40 years of age. And this “emo-porn” doesn’t serve the same purpose as straight male porn. Women don’t masturbate to romance novels. They read them because erotic-romantic-literature depicts scenarios full of sexual tension that women find titillating.

      Judging from the few romance novels that I’ve read in my day, the depictions of men are usually not *that* unrealistic; one was about a clumsy, bashful fireman and the other was about a reclusive and bankrupt English lord. The reason why depictions of men are unrealistic in romance novels is because generally women want to get to the ‘the good part’, i.e. the sexy scenes, instead of wasting time on long, drawn-out character development and other niceties of more refined literature. That’s why romance novels use slightly caricatured male characters–this genre only requires a brief sketch of its characters because its No. 1 goal is to portray romantic/sexual scenarios, not give a realistic depiction of an ideal partner.

      Everyone has sexual fantasies, male or female. Usually, people are smart enough to know the difference between fantasy and reality.

      Sep 7, 2011 at 10:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.