today is the day

There is so much to talk about when we talk about FEMINISM. And blogs (yes, Jezebel) have gotten us talking more. Thank goodness. I hate hate it when people accuse me of overreacting. Oh I do! And I'll never put the kibosh on someone's testimony; we should always feel free to complain about the Patriarchy (about anything), if the spirit moves. And it's shocking (sick, really) the way so many men and women dismiss the very real imbalances, inequity in culture (in the way of gender and sexuality and class and race and...).

However, lately, in the past 48 hours, I've been more generous with misogynists. Por ejemplo, I read this bunk, bloggy list of "Actresses Past Their Due Date," which has gotten the populous riled up. The post-in-question is dumb and mean and terrible, a symptom of the worst sort of woman-hate (and age-ism and size-ism) implicit in our contemporary Media and Entertainment Industrial Complex. But it's odd. This guy is quite the apologist, going out of his way to compliment Anne Hathaway, use the word "lovely" (?!), while he denigrates other women. He, at once, calls Drew Barrymore "chubby" and scolds Helen Hunt for spreading that tricky anorexia disease. Um? Does he even want to write this? Is this a case of two voices--reluctant, down-on-his-luck freelancer and wicked, tow-the-party-line editor? Who knows. Whatever the origin of this piece, I found myself, as I read it and a fraction of the comments, less angry than I might have expected to be. I wondered: is this sort of petty/bitchy misogyny (propagated by boys and girls [self certainly included]) just a cry for help? Yes. Indeed.

Fourth Wave-ers (a lot of folks) tend to dislike Naomi Wolf, and I don't know why. She makes a lot of sense to me (and I'm sympathetic because people always accuse her of being too generalizing and groundless and I am both of those things so much of the time but it just does not mean either of us are wrong, when we don't traffick in "concrete evidence" and [ooooof] science). Her platform on sex+The Youth, the content of a book called Promiscuities, is particularly stirring. In it, she regards my generation (and some a bit younger) wholly, regardless of gender, as suffering under the burden of loosened sexual mores (via interviews with college students). Sure. I think about this a lot--this bleak expanse of young men and women eschewing intimacy and comfort and self-care and self-respect, because, to be casual and "promiscuous" is the current norm. In theory, the sexual revolution is "the new" Oppressor, or it's become another vehicle for the same old problems, demands. I think some readers find her claims to be backward, an argument that we (especially women) do not enjoy sex, do not choose freely and happily to have sex. I don't think this is the case....I think Wolf's stance is no threat to healthy, liberated sex and our belief in its existence....both are real, you know? I have desires, valid and fantastic ones (of course). But I (and plenty of other men and women I know) have had sex I did not really want to have with people I don't particularly like. And what's that about? It appears to be an automated response to pressure, to some unknown other's idea of our what's and how's. And I've been a victim. But I've also been a co-victim, one of a pair that's fumbling and harming and not being so honest or healthy or happy. It is hard to be a woman. It is hard to be a man. And this is not too randomly tangential, I assure you.

As much as I think both sexes struggle with social-sexual pressures that can result in non-fulfillment, I think that both sexes become weary of, are damaged by the ceaseless onslaught of images of "beautiful women" (another thing Naomi writes about, maybe less judiciously). Models and actresses and the fuss that is always always made over them lead some to feel down-and-out, as, in this world of Photoshop, beings never capable of attaining such "perfection" (such a cruel thing to sell). And they lead some to feel down-and-out, as beings never capable of attaining such "perfect" girlfriends? We are all somehow, somewhere seeking phantom approval, taking hits from a phantom abuser, a corporate infrastructure utterly dependent on our feelings of worthlessness or hunger. So we get angry, judge harshly and hypocritically, say cruel things that we might never say to or about actual acquaintances. And money. Beauty and money are so conflated that I must believe some of the bile directed toward these ten ladies is a reaction to their exorbitant incomes and resulting agency in the World. I guess I just mean, in some cases (certainly not all, not half), we might have come as far as we can down the path of whistle-blowing. Women might need to show men how misogyny negatively affects us both...how we are both capable of it...is this naive? Probably. I will never stand for arguments against Feminist reactions that entail dismissals, claims that our politics don't belong everywhere. That's fucking naive--politics are everywhere, as are emotions--SERIOUSNESS. But I am increasingly interested in dialogues (as opposed to diatribes). I don't want my politics to be yet another wedge driven between mens and womens. We ought to be friends. Instead of lambasting this Spike.com (dear G-d) blogger, we might ask him: how did this work make you feel? How did your last girlfriend make you feel? Your mother? What's it all about Alfie?