Men Who Are Driven Solely By a Desire to Usurp Their Father in “Success.”

While the hands of time might persist in rendering us all genderless by 2030, there will always remain that one sect of “male”–that rare breed still born into money–that can’t help but be driven by an innate desire to usurp his father’s “success” (the Bush family generally comes to mind). This, in white “male” speak, pertains to 1) having more money and 2) procuring a more synthetic wife, paired with a younger mistress. As for poor sons born to middle class fathers, well, no one talks about them, unless it’s a story like A Bronx Tale.

The issue with this little plot to overthrow Daddy as the unshakeable patriarch is that no son can ever truly outshine the father that bore him into wealth in the first place. There is nothing impressive about a rich “boy” who becomes richer just because he slummed it a few years by not automatically becoming a CEO or senator. It goes against the very fabric of the falsity of the American dream, which still touts capitalism as a fair means to rise to the top by your own bootstraps. Thus, it is as Bob Dylan phrased it in “Temporary Like Achilles”: “I’m helpless, like a rich man’s child.”

That helplessness stems from the fact that a son can never outshine son cher papa on the integrity of merit. Even if he renounces access to the bank account and changes his last name, he will always know the cushion is there, just waiting to catch him if and when he should encounter a snag in the plan to Oedipally topple Father. And no, one doesn’t feel sorry for this pathetic and inane drive to outperform Dad’s success, particularly when the inheritance finally rolls in and the new patriarch by default–not by honor–can rename the family yacht anything cheeky directed at his father that he wants. The rich son wins by outliving his father, and by that alone. Just look at the Amises.

Men Who Are “Significantly Weaker Than Their Fathers.”

It’s not just you who has noticed a certain pussy-like trait in the millennial “male.” Now you have science on your side to prove that, yes, every “man” age 18-34 is a fragile little daisy, inept at most things, particularly functioning and having a job (HSP is, of course, a symptom of all this). And, worst of all, he’s “significantly weaker” than his father, which is only a further boon to his sensitivity and frivolous motivations.

As Missing a Dick has expressed in the past, there are some “men” so tormented by living in the shadow of their patriarch, they will even go so far as to only get a Father’s Day gift to prove they’ve surpassed their old man. But what’s most concerning about this weakness in “men” is that it isn’t just emotional, it’s physical. Literally weak. “The research, published… found that the hands and arms of men aged from 20 to 34 were less strong than those of men measured 30 years ago.” Though this might seem unbelievable considering how much masturbation and video game playing goes on in the current era, the emotional is an extension of the physical. So maybe if all these “men” in the millennial demographic weren’t so damned faint-hearted and worried about impressing their daddies when they never fucking will, we would be dealing with fewer puny “penises.”