7 March, 2008
Note to Pollitt: Kick ass
"Women are dingbats! Get it? Ha. Ha. Ha."
So, the Washington Post ran this essay by Charlotte Allen…most of the reactions I had are wonderfully put by Katha Pollitt in her response, so I won’t repeat them. There are also some interesting related links in there that include Allen’s responses to reader questions and things like that…
I consider myself to have a great sense of humor and to really support differing opinions and the creative expression of these opinions…but Allen’s piece doesn’t come off as funny at all to me, and while I couldn’t really vocalize why…Pollitt did a pretty decent job of it. For me, the bottom line in terms of gender, race, sexuality–whatever kind of group you may be a part of–is that some stereotypes may seem confirmed by specific individuals but using this ‘proof’ as a reason to stand behind those stereotypes, make them crucial to your understanding of that group, and then make judgements and enforce restrictions based on that understanding is unfair, limiting and really dangerous…even if you are open-minded, accepting and completely positive in your personal interactions with people, the reinforcement and support of the stereotypes in this way just keeps them alive in society’s understanding and interaction with people.
In her response interview article thing, she says "I wouldn’t quite use the word "ironic," but yes, I meant to be funny but with a serious point–that women want to be taken seriously but quite often don’t act serious. Also, that women and men really are different." First, obviously we’re different…anyone who has ever interacted with someone of the opposite gender knows that…we don’t need her essay to tell us that. Second, women want to be taken seriously, but don’t act serious? Allen wanted to be taken seriously (with the serious point behind her essay), but did it in a way that she claims to be funny…the essay was taken seriously, but probably not in the way expected…
Yes, we don’t hear a lot of argument when men are made fun of in women’s magazines, web sites, etc., and there is a hint of hypocrisy in the extreme feminist outcry to anything negative geared towards women. However, maybe the better solution is to attempt to gain a better understanding of both men and women (and their interaction) and try to get away from these demeaning jokes from either side. "Well, we make fun of men all the time" is, in my mind, not a good enough excuse for Allen’s unfounded, blanket statements of stupidity.
matthew said,
March 8, 2008 @ 9:36 pm
I think your last paragraph adds a very interesting point that the response by Katha Pollitt didn’t hit. The fact that there is some hypocrisy in that woman (hard core feminists) often write very negative things about men and this is almost understood and accepted. However, negative writing about woman is deemed as sexist.
I agree that about your better solution, but the problem is with these studies (like the driving one) that seem to provide concrete evidence but actually reveal nothing and just feed further negative flame throwing on both sides.
mallory said,
March 8, 2008 @ 10:11 pm
agreed…statistics for statistics sake just cause (or support) more problematic generalizations and it seems impossible to actually move away from these negative attacks from either side…partially because it is well know that dissent against the majority, the power source, or the oppressor is beneficial and necessary. but i think it’s all about being conscious of what kind of statements you’re making and what message that sends (especially if you happen to be writing for a national publication).
Also, here is the chat text that Allen did in response to the thousands of comments she got from her original essay (this is where she discusses the idea of women attacking men): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2008/03/04/DI2008030402153.html.