One comment:
"Which would you be more traumatized by, that scene -- or a doll which does not have precisely correct anatomical proportions?"
Well, gosh, lets see –
one more weird 2-minute incident among the thousands that make up an average childhood, or a lifetime of insidious brainwashing so subtle she doesn’t notice it, that causes the kind of neurotic crazy that men always bitch about?
Gee, that’s a tough call, huh?
"Which would you be more traumatized by, that scene -- or a doll which does not have precisely correct anatomical proportions?"
Well, gosh, lets see –
one more weird 2-minute incident among the thousands that make up an average childhood, or a lifetime of insidious brainwashing so subtle she doesn’t notice it, that causes the kind of neurotic crazy that men always bitch about?
Gee, that’s a tough call, huh?
This comment is wrong on several different levels. First, the demonstration had to have lasted more than two minutes. Second, it's highly doubtful that an "average" girl witnesses "thousands" of incidents as weird as that.
Third, the question I posed compared witnessing that scene to owning a Barbie doll. This feminist changed the question into which was more traumatic, witnessing that scene or a lifetime of "insidious brainwashing so subtle she doesn't notice it."
(Why is it that some people can only "win" arguments by putting words into your mouth?)
Fourth, note her use of the word "bitch," a term feminists usually object to on the grounds that it's "gender-loaded."
And fifth, as to that subtle insidious brainwashing, aren't both sexes exposed to idealized stereotypes? You never hear men complain about the "insidious brainwashing" of a lifetime of watching action/adventure movies with impossibly heroic protagonists.
The other comment:
"why do only women protest this sort of thing?"
good question. Maybe because men aren't judged primarily on their appearance, as women are.
Maybe because men just passively accept whatever metric they’re judged by and dive right into the competition, and never question whether it makes any sense at all….
(Why is it that some people can only "win" arguments by putting words into your mouth?)
Fourth, note her use of the word "bitch," a term feminists usually object to on the grounds that it's "gender-loaded."
And fifth, as to that subtle insidious brainwashing, aren't both sexes exposed to idealized stereotypes? You never hear men complain about the "insidious brainwashing" of a lifetime of watching action/adventure movies with impossibly heroic protagonists.
The other comment:
"why do only women protest this sort of thing?"
good question. Maybe because men aren't judged primarily on their appearance, as women are.
Maybe because men just passively accept whatever metric they’re judged by and dive right into the competition, and never question whether it makes any sense at all….
It is true that women are judged more on their looks than men are (she did use the word "primarily" as a qualifier), although men too are judged on their looks. (Women have better values: they often judge men more on earning power than appearance.)
I'd guess there are as many men as women who question basic values, though that's certainly hard to quantify.
But there's another, more essential difference here. The post was not a condemnation of all women; only of those who would protest a Barbie house. The vast majority of women have far too much common sense to get incensed about Barbie dolls, and realize that -- as I said in the post -- there are far more worthwhile things for women to be concerned about, such as their treatment in Muslim countries.
The feminist, on the other hand, is happy to condemn all men as a group, saying that they "just passively accept whatever metric they're judged by and dive right into the competition, and never question whether it makes any sense at all…." That is a blanket condemnation of an entire gender, not only for being "passive" but also for not being logical. Isn't that the kind of assumption that feminists are forever castigating men for making? Yet this feminist seems perfectly comfortable doing it herself.
The feminist, on the other hand, is happy to condemn all men as a group, saying that they "just passively accept whatever metric they're judged by and dive right into the competition, and never question whether it makes any sense at all…." That is a blanket condemnation of an entire gender, not only for being "passive" but also for not being logical. Isn't that the kind of assumption that feminists are forever castigating men for making? Yet this feminist seems perfectly comfortable doing it herself.
I like -- or at worst, am indifferent to -- the majority of women. This feminist seems to harbor a deep resentment against all men.
The other thing it's hard not to notice is her bitter sarcasm. By using this semi-hysterical tone -- one you rarely hear from men -- she is demonstrating how feminists are essentially unequal. Mission accomplished.
(I expounded on that inequality theme at more length here.)
(I expounded on that inequality theme at more length here.)
2 comments:
There is a song by blues singer / guitarist Buddy Guy: "Every Girl I See". The introductory lines:
"You look good and you look good
You look good and you look good
And every girl I see are looking good to me"
I find some humor in this song. Though most men may admire the classic beauty ( a pretty face coupled with some Barbie-like features), and even aspire to dating or marrying such a woman - at the end of the day they will happily embrace a whole range of women all around in every day life. Many men are not all that picky.
And there is an aspect of the typical male view, that left totally unconstrained, we'd like to have you (women) all.
Well, maybe not the Rosie O'Donnell clones.
But, I'm wondering - is this male affliction simply a product of "a lifetime of insidious brainwashing"?
- Ed
Ed --
Nah, I'd say it's a result of a couple million yeas of evolution.
Post a Comment