Dad teaches how to shave.

As always, it would be petty to point out how petty this is.

Related:

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Disrespecting Respectability, Envy, Fatherhood, Feminist Territory Marking. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Dad teaches how to shave.

  1. Will S. says:

    Reblogged this on Patriactionary and commented:
    If I may speak Millennial for a moment:

    Wow; just wow.

  2. SnapperTrx says:

    If your daughter is so vacant that explaining to her how to shave her legs doesn’t do the trick and you feel the need to show her by shaving your own:

    1. Get her married quick, because she isn’t going very far in life.
    2. Just have her start calling you mom.

  3. Frank K says:

    So why isn’t mom teaching the girls how to shave their legs?
    Duh! She isn’t in the picture. She probably frivorced Dad and ran off with a Chad.

  4. thedeti says:

    Frank K:

    It’s probably not even that (remember, if mom ran off, she took the meal ticket (er) income stream (sorry) children, with her). It’s that we can’t have masculine men as fathers; we have to emasculate them and turn them into genderless “parents” at best; or as defective mothers at worst.

  5. Cane Caldo says:

    Strong and Soft Dad: Chapter 2

    “…and now it’s out. Did you see how I did that, honey? It’s simple! Now remember: Yours will be red instead of brown.”

  6. a says:

    Can’t wait to see the tampon commercial

  7. Dalrock says:

    @Cane Caldo

    Strong and Soft Dad: Chapter 2

    Hilarious!

  8. a says:

    Ha. Cane’s comment didn’t register for me when I skimmed the comments the first time. Really could have done without the imagery presented by his added dialogue

  9. Cane Caldo says:

    @a

    Ha. Cane’s comment didn’t register for me when I skimmed the comments the first time. Really could have done without the imagery presented by his added dialogue

    😀
    Mission accomplished.

  10. Scott says:

    Re: canes comment

    I admit, I was a little slow on the uptake at first.

  11. Damn Crackers says:

    Patriarchy teaches girls to conform to Western context of femininity. Desist!

  12. Scott says:

    Damn Crackers.

    Exactly. Isn’t leg shaving oppressive?

  13. Scott says:

    On a more serious note, a question to the forum.

    I shared this just a few minutes ago on FB and a single dad (of a daughter) friend of mine basically wanted to know what guys in his position are supposed to do? He says he has had to “turn in his man card” occasionally. His question comes from a place of sincerity and his status as a single dad was against his will. I wrote:

    The issue here is not wether single dads of daughters should do whatever they can to help their daughters develop. Of course they should (and most of them do).

    There is no mention of the marital status in this commercial which is also telling.

    But more than that, the commercial seeks to create a normative standard for dads that not all of them will feel comfortable with. And when they don’t behave like this they are shamed for it.

    Did I miss anything?

  14. a says:

    @ Scott:

    You missed giving him actionable advice. For instance, I was fortunate enough to have a trusted female relative give my daughter advice with menstruation and feminine products. While I could have done it if absolutely necessary, I am sure my daughter was more comfortable with her aunt and was therefore able to get more information. I believe some things need to be handed down from the same sex, much in the way that single moms should be looking for a male mentor for their son if his father is not around.

  15. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    At least hes not wearing lipstick and a tutu.

  16. thedeti says:

    aaaaand the winner of the internet for the day is…

    Cane Caldo!

  17. CSI says:

    Hairy legs aren’t inherently un-feminine though. The women in the bible would all have had hairy legs, and nobody would have thought anything of it. But I suppose its necessary for a girl to shave her legs if she wants to fit in and not be teased.

  18. Mark MacIntyre says:

    I think body hair, including leg hair, develops partly due to testosterone, which is why men have more than women. So women shaving their legs is a kind of artificial accentuation of femininity, similar to makeup.

  19. Cane Caldo says:

    @Mark MacIntyre

    So women shaving their legs is a kind of artificial accentuation of femininity, similar to makeup.

    Yes, though I’d say artful instead of artificial. Parks and gardens are more pleasant than wilderness.

  20. Oscar says:

    @ Cane Caldo says:
    April 6, 2017 at 3:26 pm

    “Parks and gardens are more pleasant than wilderness.”

    Dude, you’re on a roll.

  21. Pingback: Dad teaches how to shave. | Reaction Times

  22. Mark MacIntyre says:

    @Cane

    Yes, though I’d say artful instead of artificial. Parks and gardens are more pleasant than wilderness.

    Ha! Nice metaphor, although as an avid outdoorsman I can’t agree with it.

  23. The Question says:

    If they had a commercial with the father and daughter swapped out for the mother and son, it would be about the mother teaching her son how to shave his legs, too – but in that instance it would be about the male child learning to how identity with his mother.

  24. Dad and daughter, walking out of an airport to a taxi line:

    “I know it was a long flight but this is Brazil honey, around here they know way more about this than I do”

  25. @Cane

    In these days of gender whimsy and self identification, Target custodial staff may have something to say about your colorful topic.

  26. feeriker says:

    So why isn’t mom teaching the girls how to shave their legs?

    Because mom, divorced from Dad since daughter was a baby, is the “male” half of a lesbian relationship and is proud of “her” leg hair and thinks daughter should be too.

  27. feministhater says:

    Hairy legs aren’t inherently un-feminine though. The women in the bible would all have had hairy legs, and nobody would have thought anything of it. But I suppose its necessary for a girl to shave her legs if she wants to fit in and not be teased.

    Not true, there were many different ways the ancients removed body hair, from shaving with bronze or iron razors, to removing hair with tweezer type implements, singeing it off with fire, rubbing with stones and even depilatory creams.

  28. Gunner Q says:

    They should have dressed the man as a competitive bicyclist. Those guy shave their legs so road rashes are easier to treat. But that would have been masculine–a guy who expects to take a few hits while having fun, maybe sporting a couple battle scars.

  29. Oscar says:

    @ Gunner Q says:
    April 6, 2017 at 4:52 pm

    “They should have dressed the man as a competitive bicyclist.”

    Or a competitive swimmer. Or a bodybuilder. Or a triathlete. But yes, that would’ve missed the point they’re trying to make.

  30. kfg says:

    Maybe he’s a competitive cyclist? Just throwing it out there, although, as a man, I use a sander myself. And why is he teaching a girl old enough to marry?

    “The women in the bible would all have had hairy legs . . .”

    Women in the Bible (and men as well) shaved their entire bodies and wore wigs. Razor and mirror from the time of Ramsses:

  31. SnapperTrx says:

    I wonder if their razors were 20$ a pop (for the good ones, at least). Or if the local pharoh-mart kept them under lock and key…..

  32. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Frank K says: So why isn’t mom teaching the girls how to shave their legs?

    Why isn’t dad teaching his girl to shave her leg by shaving his face, and having her apply that lesson to her legs?

  33. Scott says:

    RPL-

    I had the same thought. It would serve the purpose of teaching her how to shave generic skin while maintaining the bright line of distinction between men and women.

    But the ad is not concerned with that, as we know.

  34. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    The Boston Globe reports that women are doing just fine without a man in their lives: https://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2017/03/08/women-without-men-are-doing-just-fine-thank-you/0qYon1OZVlIMhJtrFgd5UI/story.html?p1=Article_Inline_Bottom

    At 32, she decided if she didn’t meet someone by the time she was 36, she’d try to get pregnant with an anonymous donor. She started attending the local chapter of Single Mothers by Choice. The facilitator at one workshop said the most important factor in raising a child alone is the ability to build a social network.

    Yes, a “social network” of female friends is a great substitute for a man.

  35. Dalrock says:

    @Scott

    It would serve the purpose of teaching her how to shave generic skin while maintaining the bright line of distinction between men and women.

    But the ad is not concerned with that, as we know.

    I disagree. This is exactly what the ad is concerned with. The whole point is to feminize the father.

  36. Scott says:

    Dal-

    Oh, yes. I’m tracking the feminizing the dad part. I think I was trying to imagine a situation (if I was a single dad) where my daughter might watch me shave my face and then apply the basic skin shaving principles to her legs. My masculinity would remain entirely intact in a case like that I believe.

  37. Cecil Henry says:

    The more I look at this I realize its another case of liberal mentality: straining a gnat and swallowing a camel.

  38. Pingback: Can single dads teach their daughters to shave? | American Dad

  39. l jess says:

    Wait for it – make-up and bra fitting next.

  40. Anonymous Reader says:

    Are we at peak feminism yet? Doesn’t look like it.

  41. Swanny River says:

    Following on I Jess, this is cross-dressing. It’s just a secular ad so we guess at the church response. My guess is a mix of correction and support. Correction would be that the man should shave his face instead and support for the servant leadership they would undoubtedly see. They would have no pushback like Dalrock has displayed .

  42. Swanny River says:

    Does the gospel coalition or piper care about dads being feminized? We don’t know because they aretoo feminized to say. Maybe the ad is a metaphor for today’s cartoon white night Christians.

  43. Hose_B says:

    Maybe I’m just still brainwashed, but I didn’t find this commercial all that bad. Superfluous maybe. A man dropping his need to act tough and manly for the sake of teaching his daughter is touching to “everyone”.
    As to why the legs and not the face……….anyone tried to teach someone under 25 principles that could be applied to other situations? They seem to be unable to apply teaching to any situation that wasn’t exactly like the first. While I was taught that one answer can be applied to mire than one problem AND that there more than one answer to the any given problem, the next gen seems to be being taught that there is one answer to each problem and principles don’t really cross over. It’s odd.
    I could also see problems with showing how to shave your face. My face does not have knees or ankles. Nor would I be able to tell her how to manage these areas as I have no experience. All I could do is show principles or show her on my ankle.

    I would never make fun of a father that did this in real life for his child. Just back it up with real male leadership and things like this would just make you be seen as stronger. Back it up with feminism and not so much.
    Just my .02

  44. Oscar says:

    Fewer people are getting married, and more people are shacking up, and the biggest increase is among people who are 50+. This should turn out well.

    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/06/number-of-u-s-adults-cohabiting-with-a-partner-continues-to-rise-especially-among-those-50-and-older/

  45. RICanuck says:

    OT

    Last night I went to men’s group at my parish. A typical S. New England bunch; mainly ethnic (French Canadian and Polish) boomers, one very devout Gen-x, and two millennials, both African.

    I asked the millenials if they had ever in their lives heard or seen any mention of any quality that is specifically male, that was good or admirable. Neither could give any examples. One of the boomers mentioned sports heroes, that’s it.

    I raised the issue because last night’s topic was lust and custody of the eyes. Men get rhetorically beaten, and beat ourselves up because we like to look at pretty women. I tried to explain that at creation, before the fall of man, God created Eve. Adam saw her, and said “This is flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone.” God ordained that man and woman would be one flesh and multiply. Adam’s gaze was good at the time of creation, and fostered one-flesh unity. It permits a long time married man to keep his love googles, and in old age see the wife of his youth as the smooth skinned perky young woman he fell in love with. One of the boomers said that that was exactly how he felt about his deceased wife.

    The male gaze is a faculty that God gave to man at creation before the fall and said it was good. Since the fall we have a tendency to abuse this gift, but from inception it was good.

    Most of the men seemed to be pretty uncomfortable with what I said. Male bashing is so ingrained in our society and churches, that even speculating that there is something good and admirable about men, as creatures of God, causes discomfort.

    I don’t know why there are so few young men in our churches.

  46. Cane Caldo says:

    @Hose_B

    Maybe I’m just still brainwashed, but I didn’t find this commercial all that bad. Superfluous maybe. A man dropping his need to act tough and manly for the sake of teaching his daughter is touching to “everyone”.

    The video is propaganda meant to subvert manliness. It says: “Real men shave their legs for their daughters because Real Men directly help their daughters be sexy.”

    If nothing else, a man should be offended at the presumption of these razor pimps.

  47. Hose_B says:

    @CaneCaldo
    Real Men directly help their daughters be sexy.

    How would this point be different if the guy had shown her the technique using his face. She is still shaving her legs to be more attractive (sexy)

  48. Frank K says:

    @RICanuck – “Most of the men seemed to be pretty uncomfortable with what I said. Male bashing is so ingrained in our society and churches, that even speculating that there is something good and admirable about men, as creatures of God, causes discomfort.”

    Small wonder western women are so attracted to Muslim immigrants who force their wives to wear veils and even beat them,or to western thugs. They say that they want sensitive, feminine men, when their actions prove otherwise/

  49. Cane Caldo says:

    @Hose_B

    How would this point be different if the guy had shown her the technique using his face. She is still shaving her legs to be more attractive (sexy)

    I did not say a man should instead shave his face to show how a daughter how to shave legs. Those who did will have to defend it. I think those men have fundamentally fallen for the marketer’s ruse that they (the marketers) have any say-so at all in the matter of how a father raises his daughter; especially in a matter concerned with women’s work. They are dancing to Angel Soft’s tune. (I called them razor pimps in error above. They are toilet paper pimps.)

    You wrote:

    A man dropping his need to act tough and manly for the sake of teaching his daughter is touching to “everyone”.

    This is it. This is what they were after, and you fell for it. Yet you are not the target audience. It is women who buy the greater total of toilet paper. It is meant to put into the heads of women this question: “Don’t you want a man who is man enough to shave his legs for a woman like you?” It is a call to the thing which is underneath courtly love.

    It is not what is said, but what is unsaid. By whatever method a man tries to teach a woman how to shave her legs, he will look silly. There is no good way to do it. Men in a cultural bind must do what they must do, but it does not therefore become manly to do something feminine. It is perverse to say that it does–and the advertisers know it!

    To say a man should teach a woman how to shave her legs in a manly way is of the type “not even wrong”. It means to make men look stupid. That–the stupidity of men–is also told to women by this ad. It is implied then that women are the smarter ones because they can and do nobly teach another woman how to shave her legs. Women can confirm their superiority if they buy Angel Soft because Angel Soft “understands her real value”.

    That’s why I mocked it instead of treating the ad a serious piece of commentary. It’s not. It is anti-man propaganda.

  50. Chris says:

    “I raised the issue because last night’s topic was lust and custody of the eyes. Men get rhetorically beaten, and beat ourselves up because we like to look at pretty women.”

    The wonderful fruits of the traditional misinterpretation of the Lord’s words about lust in Matthew 5.

    And a, your tampon remark made me LOL.

  51. @Cane

    “It is not what is said, but what is unsaid.”

    Well said. There is an old axiom in legal training that when reviewing the decision of a judge, what is not said is often as important and sometimes more important than what is said. This principle comes from the Bible, derived from the fact that the meaning of a passage depends on what is said, what is not said and sometimes what could not be said. I wish more understood that point.

    “It is perverse to say that it does–and the advertisers know it!”

    I doubt anyone would argue with you, but “the advertisers know it” flows from the axiom of Marshall McLuhan, “The medium is the message.” Commercials are carefully scripted and story-boarded. Camera angles are critical, every frame is considered and the nuances that are argued in making the commercial are so far over the head of the average person it may as well be a discussion of quantum mechanics. The thing to keep in mind is they know the subconscious mind is wide open to the nuances that go straight past the conscious mind. So, yeah, they know it and it is completely intentional.

  52. @RICanuck

    “I asked the millenials if they had ever in their lives heard or seen any mention of any quality that is specifically male, that was good or admirable.”

    Genesis 3:16 says a woman’s desire shall be for her man and he shall rule over her. If one does a bit of algebraic replacement, we get this:

    Her desire is for the man who is fit to rule over her.

    This becomes a back-handed instruction to the men, if they want the women to desire them, they must be fit to rule. Think of the attributes of a good King: Masculine dominance, charisma and confidence. That’s the stuff of which rulers are made, but just being “Alpha” does not make them fit to rule. Add to that knowledge, experience, wisdom, faithfulness, loyalty, truthfulness, courage and steadfastness. Now you have a man who is fit to rule and women find such a man highly desirable.

    To put this in terms of one of the modern religions, a quarterback has to have the size, strength, physical ability and confidence to be capable of doing the job and that’s the basic requirement, but that isn’t nearly enough. In addition he has to have the knowledge, experience, wisdom and other character traits necessary to effectively lead his men to victory. Strip out the physical prerequisites and it doesn’t matter how well a pencil-neck knows the playbook and is a strategic genius with stellar character. Nobody wants him for a quarterback because he doesn’t have what it takes and he would be ridiculed for claiming he could do the job.

    With that in mind, think of all the ways in which men are attacked. First and foremost is the feminist moral philosophy of gender equality that doesn’t just deny men the right to rule, it frames the entire issue to prelude a man from ruling over a woman. Any woman. Everything devolves from that point and every attack on men is designed to go after any aspect of a man being a ruler or being fit to rule over a woman in any way.

    The result in the church is de-masculinized, submissive, fearful men who have been convinced that women want a servant rather than a King.

  53. JT says:

    It’s also akin to the “real men wear pink” BS that some marketing firm tried to sell a few years ago. That if you balk at doing something feminine, you must be insecure in your manhood and thus less of a man than the idiot who will jump right in.

  54. imsams says:

    Girls don’t have anyone show them how to shave. “Mom, can I start shaving my legs?” “Sure. There are razors under the sink in the bathroom.” End of story.

  55. Just Saying says:

    I almost puked when I saw that commercial. That is why the West is dying – no wonder a fossil like me can still get young women. They are starved for a real man, and I’m a poor reflection of the MEN that stormed Omaha Beach, but I’ve hunted and field dressed my share of deer as well as had my war. Today’s men frankly sicken me – and from the number of young ladies that come to my bed, I’d say that women tend to feel the same.

    “real men wear pink”
    No “real men” sink balls-deep into the pink… It’s as simple as that…

  56. RichardP says:

    My problem with this entire conversation in the manosphere is that “real men” requires a definition (e.g., “real men sink balls-deep ….”) Am I truely “masculine”, holding my own frame, if my “masculinity” depends entirely on adhering to your definition?

    I don’t think Jesus was ever balls-deep in anything. So … not masculine??

    Commercials are meant to sell things. In order to sell things, they have to be noticed. In order to be noticed, they have to be controversial. It appears that this one has succeeded in spades. Sometimes being controversial isn’t anything more than being controversial for the sake of attracting attention. Attribution Theory has a lot to say about the comments made in this thread. As in “why do I attribute that meaning to that behavior – and then think that everbody else attributes the same meaning?” And Jesus wasn’t a real man just because he didn’t do … or didn’t meet MY definition of a “real man”

    To paraphrase Hamlet: There are more things to being a man or a woman, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

  57. Luke says:

    Actually, Richard, re Jesus never being “balls-deep” in anything:
    I thought that from around age 17 to 30 YO there is VERY little written about his life.
    Who is to say he had NO experiences of that nature then? (He could well have married and his wife died or something, dodging the “he was without sin” issue.)

  58. Hose_B says:

    @imsam
    “Girls don’t have anyone show them how to shave. “Mom, can I start shaving my legs?” “Sure. There are razors under the sink in the bathroom.” End of story.”

    This is only partially true. Most of the stories I’ve heard from women including my ex about their first shaving experience was “I didn’t ask. I found the razors under the sink and did it myself. I ended up with both legs bleeding profusely. Then (insert name here) cleaned me up and showed me how.”

    @RichardP
    Am I truly “masculine”, holding my own frame, if my “masculinity” depends entirely on adhering to your definition?

    Well said.

  59. Patrick Albanese says:

    30+ years ago, they told us that women didn’t need a man in their life to raise a boy.

    Now those boys are grown up and they can teach girls how to shave their legs.

    We may be screwed.

  60. Gunner Q says:

    RichardP @ 3:15 am:
    “My problem with this entire conversation in the manosphere is that “real men” requires a definition … Am I truely “masculine”, holding my own frame, if my “masculinity” depends entirely on adhering to your definition?”

    Human sexuality was designed and defined by God, not men. It cannot be changed or reinterpreted. A man who acts like a woman is a freak, not a “differently masculine man”. Not sure what there is to debate about this.

    “Commercials are meant to sell things. In order to sell things, they have to be noticed. In order to be noticed, they have to be controversial.”

    You know what else depends on being noticed? Teaching good from evil. This commercial sells evil as something normal and Dalrock noticed it in order to spotlight that evil. I doubt anybody here is going to buy Brand Z toilet paper because we point out the feminized man in the commercial.

    This is the sleight of hand we’re talking about on the other thread right now. You want to accept Mr. Barbie because “it’s just a commercial that wants to be noticed”. No, it is a showcase of evil and Christ’s justice demands we take notice. Controversy doesn’t sell product anyway; curiosity does, and no man is curious about shaving his own legs as a demonstration of female hygiene.

  61. dvdivx says:

    When I was in bodybuilding I shaved my legs but just showing the calfs would have made that obvious. Is he also going to show her how to shave a landing strip? That might sent a very different level of relationship going on. Personally I think showing your boy how to shave his face is a passage of manhood event. Every dad should do that. Anything else is no unless there is a reason. By the time most bodybuilders shave they’re weak from dieting and a lack of water anyways so their muscles pop out more.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s