Dissenting Romans, and fewer missing links

This post by Donald Sensing eerily paralleled mine on a similar subject. As fate would have it, both were written at the same time, both were inspired by thinking about du Toit’s pussification post, and as if fate needed no further cementing, both were Instalanched together!
Coincidence, no doubt.
As I said in a comment to Donald Sensing, Kim du Toit’s essay annoyed the hell out of me, even though I agreed with many of his points. I particularly disagree with kneejerk linking of effeminacy to homosexuality, though, just as I recognize it as an American cultural tradition often based on reality, further fueled by gay activists themselves. I flunked the Metrosexual test just before I read du Toit’s post, and I own guns, pit bulls instead of poodles, am not neat and tidy, and do not think I am what du Toit calls a “butt bandit.” (But yes, alas, there is such a thing!) Yet I hate stereotypical masculinity. This makes me a real misfit, and politically homeless to boot.
It gets worse.
It turns out that Sensing and I are both Romans.
No, I am not making this up. The results prove it:

You are Romans.

Which book of the Bible are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
Well, today is Friday, and as regular readers know, Friday is Online Test Day at Classical Values.
Friday is a good day for Romans.
Meanwhile, Sketches of Strain has flattered me to the point that I am blushing, and I don’t deserve it, because in reality I’m lots more worthless than he says. But thanks David! I am also honored as hell by the links from Dean Esmay, free thinker par excellence, as well as the noted Communist Revolutionary, Dave Tepper.
More links to catch up with; I just found this one, a very flattering comment from Say Uncle. Hey, what can I say? Thanks Brendan Loy. I am honored. And, special thanks to Say Uncle, whose work to help pit bulls earns him a special place in my heart.