One of my co-workers brought me an article from a paper in Limerick, Ireland regarding some of the differences between Vice President Dick Cheney and wannabe Senator John Edwards. It was written by Gwen Halley. I will attempt to cite full information about the paper's name and issue, etc, after I get back. So without further ado, here is Gwen's article in its entirety (I have inserted a couple editorial comments.):
Admit it girls: sexy Dick puts the vice in spice president. (I'm not making this up. So help me!)
Despite thousands of feminist tomes, a surfeit of girl power glossies and Sex and the City, women still refuse to come clean about what they find sexually attractive.
Last week's Cheney/Edwards American vice-presidential braw demands that we revisit Freud's perennial question, "What do women really want?" Feminists have been debating it for over 50 years and they're still tampering with the result.
And most women are complicit in the deception. If given a choice between an "Edwards type" and a "Cheney type", publicly women would emphatically choose the "Edwards type". But privately, she wants the "Cheney type". Admitting that she fancies Mr. Ugly over Mr. Pretty is not only an assault on social etiquette but is potentially indecent. The ugly truth of women's carnal desires subverts all of what it means to be a "woman" in society.
Society dictates that women should seek some sort of physically perfect male ideal. However, what women find sexually attractive is usually the antithesis. (There is hope for me!) Women enjoy looking at pictures of daylight boys like Jude Law and David Beckham - but it doesn't mean they want to take them home into the darkness.
And publicly admitting that she prefers the "Cheney type" is to commit a grave social faux pas, and she will forever be remembered as the weird, kinky pervert locked in a PVC cat suit of low self-esteem.
So for those of you with sensitive stomachs: stop reading now.
Dick Cheney is sexy. Still with me? See how women's sexual attraction to ugly men is the taboo of sexual taboos? The shame is simply too much to bear. This is why women are happy to go along with the "Edwards is sexy" conceit.
In female reality, Edwards is the nice, smiley platonic friend-next-door and Cheney is the absolute b*****d. (Sorry ‘bout that!)
Hawks like Cheney violate politically-correct American campus "Permission to Kiss" codes, while doves like Edwards memorise (this is the British spelling) them. Cheney understands power and knows how to deploy it. You don't have to be a Texas 'Security Mom' to understand why women see power as sex. Women are biologically programmed to see the sexuality of power.
If confronted with a nocturnal intruder, Cheney is the man (even with the dodgy heart) every woman wants by her side devising a plan of attack. Thumbelina Edwards would be too busy drawing up terms for negotiating a treaty with the psychopath. (Wow! This is evident even in Ireland! Why doesn't everyone here get it?) Give women a snarling Rottweiler on the porch any day over a preening Pomeranian in the window. (BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! Preening Pomeranian... too much! HOHO. Stop it! You're hurting me!)
Women's secret attention to the rotund and follicly-challenged has much to do with their fundamentally insecure masochistic-narcissistic personalities. Women want to feel feminine and fragile (Once again, HOPE!) and they're not going to get this from a paperweight metrosexual poser who smells better than they do. (Snicker!)
But women remain dishonest about what really turns them on. It hasn't been helped by the fashion/entertainment industry's relentless propaganda which has given birth to "cosmetic couples" - all outward show without any real desire beneath the socially-impressive facade. We have become enslaved to society-conscious "relationship correctness".
But I'm talking to myself, aren't I? Well, the link between Dick Cheney's mouth and raw sex was always going to be a hard sell.
No comments:
Post a Comment