‘Gutfeld’ panelists react to Vice President Kamala Harris’ interview with radio host Howard Stern.
So, The New York Times now claims that even this new so-called “positive masculinity” of progressive men sucks, too. The article’s written by a feminist named Ruth Whippman. Perfect name, if you ask me. I guess Sarah Ballcrusher was taken. So we can forget toxic masculinity. Now, even positive masculinity is the problem. “After the cartoon supervillainy of Donald Trump and the smarmy misogyny of J.D. Vance, the positive masculinity of Walz and his ilk is a joyful relief. But for the next generation of boys, we might do better to ditch the masculinity rhetoric altogether.” I know.
She adds, “the idea that boys must use masculinity as a constant reference point for their own value is harmful to them and others.” Whatever, lady. But look, what do you expect from the mindset that thinks women can sport a 5:00 shadow but then mock women who want to be good wives and mothers? They can no longer define a woman, so what the hell do they know about men?
KAMALA HARRIS’ HUSBAND DOUG EMHOFF ‘RESHAPED THE PERCEPTION OF MASCULINITY’: MSNBC HOST
Sadly, the left’s only real masculinity these days is coming from their admirals. But look, having a liberal feminist write about masculinity is like having a vegan review The Outback Steakhouse. She’ll make everyone in the place miserable and you can’t trust her with a knife. But it is funny, after 300,000 years of functional biology featuring both male and female organisms in just the last few decades, we have thoughtful experts deciding that all of that is wrong. What an about-face. It’s not unlike Howard Stern.
I mean, talk about a transition. On Tuesday, he conducted an interview with Kamala Harris that was so simpering and feminine that I got my period while listening to it. You should hear what keeps him up at night.
HOWARD STERN: This is what keeps me up at night. I don’t understand how my fellow Americans. I don’t even understand how this election is close. And yes, I’m voting for you, but I would also vote for that wall over there.
Well, he’s half right. We do need a wall, you know, to keep out gang members, fentanyl dealers, human traffickers and Ana Navarro. What’s funny, though, is that Stern actually thought that was a compliment. Stern has become such a wussified sycophant he doesn’t realize that telling Kamala that he’d vote for a wall is telling her that he knows she’s as dumb as one. I mean, not to mention Trump is the wall candidate, not Cackles McKneepads. Stern got even more pathetic, wondering how she doesn’t nap.
HOWARD STERN: When you say you don’t nap, I get it. Because, like, what you’ve taken on is extraordinarily difficult. And I mean, do you feel the pressure of the moment in the sense that, like when I met you out in the hall, I said, I’m really nervous because I want this to go well for you. I want it to go well for the country.
Hold on. I need a minute.
All right, we’re back. Now, remember, Stern used to throw baloney slices at strippers’ butts. With accuracy, I might add. Now, he’s worried the possible leader of the free world can’t handle his verbal foot rub. I wonder if he used to get this nervous for the strippers before he’d spank them on their bare a**es with a dead fish. Here’s Stern on anyone daring to poke a little fun at Kamala.
HOWARD STERN: Even when I watched them on Saturday Night Live with the… Where they have Maya Rudolph playing you. I hate it. I don’t want you being made fun of. I…there’s too much at stake. I believe the entire future of this country right now– I mean, as America, land of the free, home of the brave, I think it’s literally on the line.
So, a guy who’s supposed to be funny for a living now claims her candidacy is too important to joke about. This is a guy who once joked right after the Columbine massacre that the killers should have raped the students before killing them. Not that I like that, Stern, but this pendulum swing from saying the most tasteless thing in the universe to putting your balls in a tic tac container, you’ve got to wonder what’s going on here. It’s striking that the king of the most misogynistic humor ever now turns into a breathless **** over a progressive, hopelessly shallow candidate. But maybe that’s the explanation.
This is Stern’s self-imposed penance for subjugating women to demoralizing stunts, capitalizing on desperate females, thirsting for attention, even if it’s from an oily paddle striking their bare a**es. True, much of Stern’s transformation is based mainly on a delusional hatred for Trump but it’s also coming from a bottomless hatred for himself and his past. And he’s projected his loathing onto Trump, which gains him accolades from his Hamptons neighbors and his new pal Jimmy Kimmel, who’s also doing penance for his sins of the past.
But is Howard simply redefining masculinity? And why is it always the male lefties who are so desperate to get rid of masculinity entirely? It’s guilt and self-preservation. Because scrape beneath the surface of any liberal male and what do you find? A creep. Terrified of his priggish past. Piggish past. I mean, not priggish. What is priggish? And that fear turns them into obedient mouthpieces for a completely unqualified candidate.
They desperately forfeit logic and reason. And with that, all traces of masculinity. And so, Howard, you’ve been in therapy for, what, 50 years? And I just diagnosed your problem in one monologue. No worries. The first visit is free.
