Who IS this guy?!

'Niceguy' Eddie

Political Talk Show Host and Internet Radio Personality. My show, In My Humble Opinion, (original, huh?) airs on Tuesdays at 10:PM and Saturdays at 8:PM, Eastern time on RainbowRadio.

Feel free to contact me at niceguy9418@usa.com. You can also friend me on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, and Tumblr, and support my Patreon. Also, if you don't mind the stench, you can find my unofficial "fan club" over HERE. ;)


Thursday, May 12, 2011

Three Romantic Ideals

Is it me, or does it seem sometimes that the race to the top of Conservative media is little more than a contest to see who can be the biggest dick?

As I mentioned in my last post, I posted something on Media Matters that got a hugely positive response and I wanted to expand on it. It was in response to this little display of douchebaggery by Glenn Beck:

Now... put all politics aside for the moment, and let's consider what he's barfing at: The daughter of a skin cancer survivor (and a decorated Vietnam Veteran, at that!) is raising public awareness about the disease and the risk of sun damage, and in doing so, exposes her... SHOULDERS! (Oh my god, the SCANDAL! Next there will dancing!) And while it is completely irrelevant, I'll point that the woman in question is rather quite attractive. Really beautiful, actually.

So... What the fuck is Glenn Beck problem?! (Please don't answer that, we'll be here all day and night!)

Now... what I posted, and what I'm going to re-state here, I posted once before on MMFA, on another piece showcasing Glenn Beck's naked misogyny, when he used the Royal Wedding as a platform to rate women on his scale of 'hottness.'

OK... At this point it is patently obvious that Glenn Beck has a SERIOUS problem with women. But, as I'm sure I don't need to point out, the Right has a serious problem with women in general. (You KNOW that Rush Limbaugh is not on his fourth wife because so many women can't get enough of him!)

And besides... Think about it: If a woman is brainlessly repeating the party line? (Coulter, Malkin, Ingrahm, etc...) or is a party insider? (Palin, Bachman, O'Donnell) They can't get enough of her. These guys practically dry-hump Palin every time she's in the room. But if one starts questioning their malfeasance (like Rachel Maddow) or has the audacity to be independent or has the nerve to *gasp* age (Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton) suddenly they can't even discuss policy without mentioning how ugly they think these women are! And fro the most part? That the extent of their argument!

You know... I don't think I ever heard a Conservative coherently state one of Nancy Pelosi's policies and explain why they find it so abhorrent. All any Conservative has EVER been able to tell me about Nancy Pelosi is that she's (1) Liberal (duh!) and (2) Ugly, old and/or botoxed.

So I want to be clear that I am not stating the following merely as a way of burnishing my own feminist cred, but rather to, in one simple post, neuter and debunk every single occurrence of this brand of Right Wing misogyny that has ever occur ed and ever will. So let me get on my soapbox, and elaborate on my romantic idealism:

Rule #1: All women are beautiful.

Rule #2: If you meet someone who truly makes you happy, and who you truly want to make happy in return, physical traits up to and including gender are not important. Should you be gay, or the they be trans, etc... This is not important. Just BE HAPPY. And MAKE EACH OTHER HAPPY. This is all you can do in this life.

Rule #3: The sexiest part of a woman's body is between her ears.

First off, let me point out strait up that these are ideals. As I am human, I am forced to admit that I do not always live up to my ideals. No human being does. At times, we fail. (And to be fair, I can not honestly say that I have ever been tested on Rule #2.) But these are things I truly believe. And I want to address some of the challenges that have been posed, just to show you that, yes, I do really believe in them.

ALL Women? Really?

Yes, all women. And here: I'll prove it to you. This is for the Heterosexual Men out there: Picture for a moment the least fortunate looking woman you know. (On a purely physical level, I mean.) Now think of the best looking man you can think of... Brad Pitt in Legends of the Fall, maybe. (Sure, why not?) Now, let me ask you: Which one would you rather have sex with?

I rest my case.

If the least beautiful woman you can think of is sexually preferable to the most beautiful man I can think of? Then all women MUST be beautiful!


What about... ANN COULTER?

Hoo boy... That's a tough one isn't it.

And it a sad example because it the one time you really see LIBERALS piling on and pointing out how ugly they think she is. And guys? Don't do this. Seriously. Not cool.

First of all, what Ann Coulter SAYS and WRITES is vile, disgusting and despicable in it own right. Her physical appearence is irrelevant to the scumbaggery that she puts out for a living. (She puts out for a living? LOL) (SHAME on me for writing that, and on you if you laughed at it!) The importance of exposing the vile, dishonest and downright un-American nature of what she says and writes is to great to risk the credibility of your argument by acting like a dick-thinking right winger and trashing her appearance. We're better than that. And more importantly? WE'RE RIGHT.

Besides... Imagine for a minute that Rachel Maddow looked exactly like Ann Coulter. Would you stop watching her? Would you stop listening? WOuld you no longer take her seriously? Would you feel the need to point out how hideous she is? I doubt it.

So fine: Coulter goes out of her way to be repulsive. And he lack of attractiveness? I'll bet dollars to dimes comes from our hatred of what she says, writes and stands for, and has little, if anythng at all to do with her physical traits. Ann Coulter is exactly as beautiful as she chooses to be at any given time. The same can be said of every other RW Woman I mentioned above: There is nothing wrong with their physical appearace. (Rule #1) It's completely irrelevant (Rule #2) because the sexiest part of a woman's body is her BRAIN (Rule #3)...

...which is really why we can stand the sight of these people!

But that certainly doesn't mean that we should act like RW misogynists and put it in those terms!

Anyway, that's my philosophy. And let me tell you: My world is a far more beautiful place for having adopted it.


  1. Once again, Eddie, some interesting timing. I'm in the process of going through Michael Connelly's (THE LINCOLN LAWYER, if you don't know his work) Harry Bosch mystery novel series. The detective's investigation takes him to an upper crust strip club, and Connelly puts this reaction into his hero's mind:
    "Bosch was immediately mesmerized. The woman was beautiful and the first thought he had was to question why she was doing this. He had always believed that beauty helped women get away from many of the hardships of life. This woman, this girl, was beautiful and yet here she was. Maybe that was the real draw for these men, he thought. Not the glimpse of a naked woman, but the knowledge of submission, the thrill of knowing another one had been broken. Bosch began to think he had been wrong about beautiful women."
    Something to think about, eh?

  2. Beauty is both in the eye of the beholder, and it is both seen and unseen. (UGLY, OTOH, pretty much goes clear to the bone, and is impossible to hide to anyone who can see it.)

    The kind of beauty I appreciate most may not impress MOST men (usually scares 'em off, actually - or so I've read and been told) but then... it doesn't fade with age either! (So... BONUS, if you're the type who appreciates it!)

    Also... all this macho stuff about conquests and submission? Kind of drives home the point of just how obsolete men really are. Sorry to say that, but think about it: Men and women are basically equal when it come to decision making, leadership, data analysis, etc... And where we're different women generally have the edge - especially when you account for the general lack of opportunity they've historically been given.

    Women can "MAN-UP" when they need to, and yet few men can bring themselves to be anything but MEN. (Having any sensitivities, or typically feminine strengths is considered a weakness!) And yet what natural advantages do we have really? Strength, speed and endurance? That's pretty much it. That's nice if you're hunting Mastodons with spears and shit, but it pretty much became obsolete with the invention of the GUN. (Sarah Palin can take down a moose as well as I could, probably better. Now, I could take down Sarah Palin... but not if she had a gun!) If nothing else, we became obsolete with the invention of the gun, and yet somehow we managed to hang on. (Thanks Religion, Conservatism and every other roadblock to social progress for that, I guess!) And, to me, it seems that the men who cannot accept this feel the need to HIGHLIGHT just how outdated they are by continuing to disparage women of intellect in ways that only show THEMSELVES to be intellectually inferior! (Yeah, well... SHE'S UGLY!) Brilliant counter-argument, Mr. Man.

    "Men of quality are not threatened by women of equality."

    Saw that crocheted on a pillow once. Strange place, I guess, but it stuck with me.

    Thanks for your comment.