jthad1129 said:

So just because you don't agree with that archetype of masculinity, that means it's not valid? There are guys that hunt, don't like French art, and don't want to get manicures or facials. So what? If you do, that's all right for you but maybe not for someone else.

I think we need to stop telling men to feel guilty about things that Mother Nature hardwired into us.

guitarslinger44 said:

Believe me, I know it's changed. I don't disagree, but the point I was making was the point you made in your next sentence.



Paisley's one of those "C&C" guys who act more like rock stars than country stars. I appreciate a guy like Toby Keith a little more because he's not afraid to be funny, or get his tail kicked on screen. But anybody who has to tell you "I'm Still A Guy" is suspect. Just like that Faith Hill "Mississippi Girl" song is transparently phony, a la 'Jenny From The Block."



Please, one facade at a time! The Hip-Pop minstrel show deserves a thread of its very own. You're right, but the dynamics are much different. All fans are more likely to believe the rap poseur because he looks the part: he's invariably a young black male.



But if you're likely one of the guys you're dogging when you leave the stage or studio you look like a fool.

As you know, some people carry the image better than others and make more relatable songs. Keith's "Good Once As I Ever Was " (or whatever it's called) is a great one.

coolcat said:

I don't see it, either.

namepeace said:

I agree with you about Toby Keith Vs. Brad Paisley. Keith DOES carry the image much better than Paisley does and that's one of the reasons I'm not much of a Paisley fan, because he's hard to take seriously. Most of the songs he's got on the radio with the exception of "Letter To Me" and "Wrapped Around Your Finger" are humorous and this song is no exception. THat's why I think it's silly to get offended over it because given the rest of his output, anyone taking this song seriously is looking at it all wrong. I disagree with your premise that he's "suspect" for singing it for the same reason and also because I doubt he wrote it.

And if he IS one of those guys when he leaves the stage, well, I guess that's all on his conscience.

Funny or not though, I think the song says something a lot of guys wish they could and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. The fact that a song like this goes over so well (and it's HUGE on pretty much all the country stations I listen to) says something a bit larger about society as a whole or at least the portion of it listening to these stations.

I love most all music but Death Metal, Hardcore Gangsta Rap and Country.

Here's another reason to support my hatred of this genre...this man's man bullshit...and from a guy named Paisley no less

Slave2daGroove said:

Forreal.

This especially gets me:



If this is how this moron defines his masculinity, he needs some strong therapy. I agree with a previous poster, he comes across as a completely imbecilic, cretinous pig thanks to these lyrics.

guitarslinger44 said:

Why does that define masculinity? My dad is the biggest manly man, football player, coach, military police, lock up the guns etc. and he gets a pedicure because he wants too. I would think it would be a horrible stereotype type for straight hetero men. I'm sure there are some very straight body builders that tan, shave, groom, mani, pedi etc. even get some highlights.

The song seems to refer to 'guys' and those who 'knock people around' and 'still have a pair.'

I think, it's cool he's just a hardcore, man thats knows he's still a guy. some, may like it with a pretty womenly twist, he's proud of his, manhood pair
& stick.

2 each thier on.

Just a classic case of a stupid stereotype. It's no surprise it comes from a country singer.

jthad1129 said:

What I'm saying, and the point you seem to be missing is, everyone has their own definition of masculinity. Just because you don't like the definition presented in the song doesn't make it any less valid.

I don't see why hunting, owning a gun, or not wanting to get a facial is so offensive to you. There are guys who do that. It's just one kind of masculinity and those things don't necessarily DEFINE masculinity per se. I think you need to realize that your definition is not everyone's definition.

Moonbeam said:

I bet you're a lot more forgiving of the stupid stereotypes that rappers present.

guitarslinger44 said:

Bet you're wrong...

I suppose the song may be a joke, but since we're discussing it seriously here...

I guess what I really don't understand is the compulsion to be seen as belonging to some steretypical group ("guys" in this case). Apparently this requires certain behaviors, possesions, etc...I imagine there's a checklist somewhere. Maybe just do what you like and don't feel compelled to fit into a stereotype? Oh, and work on losing the need to pigeonhole others.

CandaceS said:

Preach!

guitarslinger44 said:

YOU must be a little confused by what I am saying. I am not defining masculinity at all or presenting what should be 'valid' to any man. I am not stating any definition. By posting Brad Paisley's lyrics to Brad Paisley's song and HIS interpretation of what being a 'guy' is, should be questioned. I was hoping that some straight, so called 'real men' might step up and say that they do a lot of the things listed in the lyrics BUT ALSO do some of the things that make them 'less than' a guy.

I know its just a song and BP's audience and customers buy into that whole genre of sterotype. That is expected. I also don't have cowboy boots or a ten gallon black hat. I also don't want to be that 'guy' either.

jthad1129 said:

You'll have to forgive me if that last reply I made was a little confrontational. I was bit drunk last night when I typed it. I got passionate.

You said, "Why not change the song title to, 'I'm Still A Pig'" and that was what got me. I don't see why being that type of man presented int he song makes one a "pig." That's why I said what I said about you trying to define masculinity. If I got it wrong, please let me know, but that's what I inferred from what you typed.

I'm actually one of those guys. I like French art, use moisturizer, at one point used to be described as metrosexual,and don't need incentive to give my chick a backrub, but I guess I just have a problem with the constant attacking of the male stereotype presented in this song. I don't see what the big deal is about guys who like to hunt, who don't care about French art and would hit a guy for feeling up his girl. Hell, I'd probably do that myself in the right situation.

I think the song is sort of a retaliation of sorts. In this day and age, a lot of women WANT metrosexual types of men and men are expected to be more sensitive and in touch with their feelings, yet we're still derided for being to emotional and therein lies the confusion. Women want the chivalry a man's man would provide but also the more sensitive stuff that doesn't always come easy to a man like that. What happens to the men who aren't metrosexual and don't find being sensitive an easy thing to do?

As a country singer myself, I noticed that the country market is one of the only markets that still truly appreciates the traditional "man's man" type of guy and in fact, celebrates it. Yeah, some of the guys look a little metro, but there's room for that too, wheras in the more pop market, every guy has to look like some Calvin Klein model who looks like he takes more time to get ready than his chick does.

In this day and age, gender roles are more confused than they've ever been and with all the attention our society has given to women, helping them succeed in the workforce and in school, we've left the young men behind. A lot of young men don't see where they fit in anymore and a song like this gives them something to look up to in a sense. I don't think it's necessarily the best example, but it's SOMETHING.

CandaceS said:

The song just presents a shared list of behaviors that a lot of guys have, perhaps unconsciously. I don't think it's meant to be a list of "If you're a guy, this is what you're like and what you do."

guitarslinger44 said:

You fail to see the 'big deal' in physically abusing other people?
1) It's illegal (in most countries, at least )
2) It makes you look like an asshole
3) It won't make your girlfriend think you are 'cool'



I have no problem with men who like to hunt, or wear cowboy boots or whatnot, but violent fucks don't get much love or understanding from me

FuNkeNsteiN said:

Okay, I'll definitely give you that.

guitarslinger44 said:

It works both ways right? There have always been men that weren't the "manly" man type... and they had trouble with women because they were too "effeminate"...

I still think this is far more than case than the manly man having trouble with women...

The thing that hasn't been discussed is the rampant homophobia in our culture... maybe men can get away with being metrosexual... but a man acting too much like a woman could get killed for that... I don't think a man's going to get killed for acting too manly...

FuNkeNsteiN said:

feeling up someone else's girl isn't much better, is it?

NDRU said:

Well, it's not cool either, but beating people up is waaaaayy uncooler

FuNkeNsteiN said:

unprovoked, I'd probably agree.

But you can't just go around grabbing women's asses and expect to not be beaten up!

NDRU said:

I have a friend who was at a bar one night with some friends and some guy grabbed one of the girls in his group's asses. One of the guys in the group stepped up to confront this guy and eventually people not associated with the event jumped in on either side and a riot ensued. So yeah, grabbing strange women is a no no!
[Edited 4/17/08 14:54pm]

guitarslinger44 said:

She's a regular Helen of Troy!

NDRU said:

Indeed!