Of course, I mean "effeminate" in a very specific way. Not in terms of having two X chromosomes or regularly shaving one's legs. More in a sort of "thinking-that-'Fifty-Shades-of-Grey'-is-something-other than-a-steaming-pile-of-dreck" way; a way that reinforces and insanely celebrates our culture of debility.
I buy that, to a degree. With the caveats of extreme individual variation around a statistical mean, and the awareness that current technological and demographic trends seem to mitigate against this being an immutable physically determinate characteristic. In fact, I'd say there's a good case to be made that the American impotence exhibited following the Aurora shootings is a clear symptom of the devaluation of of the transactional, male principle in contemporary culture.
Here's what I mean: following the death of those 12 people in Aurora, the airwaves were filled to bursting with panty-wetting, tear-filled sobs of helpless terror that would have embarrassed a North Korean anchorperson. The Romney and Obama campaigns both suspended activity after issuing suitably conventional statements of feigned piety, as good girls will, but there was no shortage of hacky partisans publishing one of the two ur-varieties of opportunistic polemical garbage:
1. The killer is a symptom of our out-of-control politics, being clearly a member of some dodgy right or left wing roup.
2. OMG! We have to stop this from EVER HAPPENING AGAIN!!! Which means either:
a.) Banning all sales of any item capable of causing a bruise anywhere near the order of magnitude
rendered by a Nerf(tm) football, or
b.) Subjecting anyone passing through the United States to an incredibly invasive series of psychological
and physical examinations, possibly on a secret and ongoing basis.
From the transactional, masculine point of view, all of this is clearly an unproductive waste of time.
Politically, this election will probably go down in history as the high point (or low point, depending upon your point of view) of American consensus. Never before has the American public had to endure such a farcically hopeless choice between two bland and barely distinguishable clones.
The key platform of the Republican candidate, whose drab monotone voice is a dead giveaway that his handler's pack him each night in a cardboard box filled with styrofoam peanuts, is repeal of the health care law that he pioneered. And the supposed theme of the Democratic candidate is the expiration of the millionaire tax cuts that he himself actively campaigned for, over the objections of his own caucus, who had veto-proof majorities in both houses when he signed them into law in 2010.
The fact that these two eunuchs are considered to be the most powerful politicians in the U.S. is a clear indication that America is not even trying politically.
And the obviously doomed prescription of preventative measures just reinforces the point. In case you hadn't noticed, Humanity has several millenia worth of laws outlawing murder on the books. Unsurprisingly, the deterrence value of these laws has proven mainly effective on the law abiding segments of the population.
As a matter of fact, there is a considerable body of evidence to the effect that Americans are, in an absolute sense, completely indifferent to murder and sociopathy. Just hours after the Aurora shootings, it was announced that an even larger number of people--14 immigrant workers--were killed on a Texas highway, and I guarantee you neither Romney nor Obama issued any statement about that.
Only a handful of commentators would have noted that Americans' poor diets and ordinary traffic obstacles are far more statistically dangerous than any firearm.
Also, to my knowledge, absolutely zero percent of them even bothered to ask the practical question of how injured survivors are going to PAY for their medical treatment. Didn't we just go through a near civil war about this very issue? If ever there was a viscerally engaging illustration of the non-discretionary character of health care, and the utter necessity for America to adopt universal single payer coverage, this was it. We may not be able to outlaw danger, but we certainly CAN do better in dealing with the aftermath.
Actually, we Americans love murder and mayhem when it happens in Afghanistan or the Palestinian territories--provided it serves to boost our perceived sense of control over politically volatile client states and gas prices.
So what's up with this circle jerk of totally empty gesturing? I say it's an example of the stereotypically female behavior of "talking to be heard" rather than "talking to be understood".
The stereotypically masculine analysis of the events in Aurora admits that they present us with two broad categories of problems:
1. Problems which can be reasonably be solved, such as providing cost effective health care.
2. Problems which will never be solved--such as eradicating existential evils, whatever that might mean, or preventing petty disagreements and all remotely possible physical dangers.
Proceeding from this analysis, a male would conclude by passing discussion on those items which can never be solved and focusing all of one's energies on practical remedies for those problems which can be solved. But what Americans have opted to do instead, is engage in an embarrassing b*tch fest about what a scary nasty world it is out there. This will definitely not give provide us with even the slightest bit of practical relief.
The unbalanced, mostly effeminate American isn't interested in solving problems. What this whinging accomplishes is nothing more than a "relationship tweak", merely acclimatising us to the incompetence and abuse from our supposed institutional "leaders" like the crocodile-tear shedding Willard Romney and Barry Obama. This is the actual point--avoiding meaningful confrontation and making Americans feign affectionate intimacy with their rapists.