Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Pollitt Beyond Parody
In the Sunday Times Book Review, Toni Bentley, author of The Surrender, a panegyric to anal sex, reviews Learning to Drive: And Other Life Stories, the latest offering from Katha Pollitt. Bentley succinctly summarizes Pollitt's argument:
Have you heard the latest? "Men are rats." This directly from the desk of Katha Pollitt, a longtime feminist columnist at The Nation.
Learning to Drive charts Pollitt's relationship with an unfaithful boyfriend, offers her thoughts on plastic surgery, and bemoans the yuppification of the Upper West Side. In one of many beyond parody passages, Bentley recounts Pollitt's attempt to crack into her boyfriends email account:
She relishes the moment when he will betray his new girlfriend (he marries her, fingers - his and ours - crossed) and attempts to read his e-mail by guessing his password: " ‘marxism,' ‘marx,' ‘karlmarx,' ... ‘belgium,' ‘chocolate,' ‘godiva,' ‘naked,' ‘breast,' ‘cunnilingus,' ‘fellatio.'"
One can only wonder why she didn't try "theworkerscontrolthemeansofproduction."
When Pollitt sees her ex and his new beau crossing Riverside Drive, she imagines running them both down, retiring as a prison librarian and "becoming a lesbian." To this, Bentley objects. Sort of:
It's not that I'm against killing unfaithful men - especially one like Pollitt's, who "walks out the door after seven years with a wooden spoon, a spatula, a whisk." It's the loss of self-respect that bothers me. Isn't there a better way for women to show their superiority?
Elsewhere in the Sunday Times, the typically combative (and always irritating) Deborah Soloman plays slow-pitch softball with Pollitt ("one of the country's most eloquent feminists" whose new book is occasionally "hilarious"), though grills the author about betraying women by being a crappy driver. First question: "Why would you choose to advertise your lifelong fear of driving when it reinforces old stereotypes about female ineptitude and ditziness?"
Whole interview here.
The LA Times reviews Pollitt here.
|9.24.07 @ 2:44PM|#
"walks out the door after seven years with a wooden spoon, a
spatula, a whisk."
Wait, Katha Pollitt was sleeping with Felix Unger?
|9.24.07 @ 2:50PM|#
Isn't there a better way for women to show their
superiority?
Better than what? Turning lesbian? No. No there isn't. Women with
truly solid self-respect, will upon exiting an unsatisfying
heterosexual relationship, show their superiority by video taping
their empowering dyke lovemaking and making it available on the
internet. A good rule of thumb for overcoming a bad relationship,
is to upload one lesbian love session for every month the
relationship lasted. Getting over a seven year man will probably
require a strap-on anal scene.
|9.24.07 @ 2:51PM|#
When Pollitt sees her ex and his new beau crossing Riverside
Drive
Don't you mean his new belle? Or did Pollitt's ex turn gay after
deciding that Pollitt wasn't for him?
|9.24.07 @ 2:53PM|#
Oops. I meant belle, but, come to think of it, I am going to be presumptuous and stick with beau.
Xmas|9.24.07 @ 2:58PM|#
Thanks Warren.
Though that last bit of your comment doesn't necessarily require
another woman.
Speaking of bad female drivers, I'm still awaiting a woman to admit
to the "look-away". That's when a woman who's about to pull out
onto the road looks you straight in the eye, then
looks away and pulls out right in front of you.
Ladies, no amount chivalry can override Newton's first and second
laws. And there is no chivalry on the road.
|9.24.07 @ 2:59PM|#
But probably not too presumptious. What kind of man could put up with her for seven years?
Jennifer|9.24.07 @ 3:08PM|#
I have never, ever tried to break into the e-mail accounts of any of my boyfriends or other acquaintances. But if I did, I would never, ever tell anybody, because psychopathic behavior like that is supposed to be a SHAMEFUL SECRET, not something you fucking brag about.
|9.24.07 @ 3:13PM|#
So exactly what's the point of MCM's post again, aside from him being threatened by feminism?
Episiarch|9.24.07 @ 3:17PM|#
because psychopathic behavior like that is
supposed to be a SHAMEFUL SECRET
What, not respecting the privacy of someone you are supposedly in
love with isn't OK?
People like this, who have a tendency to inhabit the Upper West
Side, are one reason I specifically avoided that neighborhood when
looking for apartments.
The Upper West Side is sort of like the San Franciso of New
York.
Dave B.|9.24.07 @ 3:23PM|#
So is feminism about being permanently hung up over married ex-boyfriends now? How empowering!
|9.24.07 @ 3:24PM|#
Katha Pollitt = "one of the country's most eloquent
feminists"?
This a much worst insult to feminism than anything I can come up
with this late in the afternoon.
emmajane|9.24.07 @ 3:26PM|#
If Ms. Pollitt had one ounce of ability to laugh at herself,
this accident could be avoided. I've always considered myself an
equity feminist, but I'm embarrassed to say that the
"feminist/change lightbulb" joke is often painfully true.
And what Jennifer said.
|9.24.07 @ 3:32PM|#
"walks out the door after seven years with a wooden spoon, a
spatula, a whisk."
If I had to spend seven years with only a wooden spoon, a spatula
and a wisk for company, I'd walk out, too. That's almost as bad as
having to spend seven years with Katha Pollitt.
|9.24.07 @ 3:35PM|#
What a coincidence! Last night I bought a used copy of "First Wives Club" and watched it with my ex-wife.
George W Bush|9.24.07 @ 3:36PM|#
Is someone saying it is not ok to secretely go through another persons email?
GILMORE|9.24.07 @ 3:38PM|#
bemoans the yuppification of the Upper West
Side....
This is laughable in the same way people bemoan the growing number
of hispanics in Texas... not because of immigration, but because
Hispanics simply have more babies. The Upper west side was a never
exactly a haven for artists and intellectuals. Hipsters in
Williamsburg bemoan the 'gentrification' of a neighborhood where
they would have stabbed them to death 10 years earlier for their
sneakers. You cant have your cake and eat it too, apparently.
some of the stupidist stuff in the world is generated by otherwise
highly intelligent people who start with oversimplified conclusions
in mind
Yes, men are rats.
And women are fucking crazy.
Next shocker: "people act according to self interest"
|9.24.07 @ 3:38PM|#
I have never, ever tried to break into the e-mail accounts
of any of my boyfriends or other acquaintances. But if I did, I
would never, ever tell anybody, because psychopathic behavior like
that is supposed to be a SHAMEFUL SECRET, not something you fucking
brag about.
I've read Pollit's work before and won't be checking out her book
because I have no interest in her as a thinker or a writer. But
Jennifer, one of the things that would make a memoir valuable is
the author's willingness to tell the truth about things most of us
would consider a shameful secret. I don't think it's necessarily
considered bragging.
Jennifer|9.24.07 @ 3:46PM|#
But Jennifer, one of the things that would make a memoir
valuable is the author's willingness to tell the truth about things
most of us would consider a shameful secret. I don't think it's
necessarily considered bragging.
I have not and will not read the book, but I'm guessing that the
e-mail break-in scene wasn't written in the context of "and that's
how I knew I'd hit rock bottom."
|9.24.07 @ 3:46PM|#
Is someone saying it is not ok to secretely go through
another persons email?
It's fine as long as it's a private company or individual. Get with
the program, George!
Episiarch|9.24.07 @ 3:50PM|#
and attempts to read his e-mail by guessing his password: "
'marxism,' 'marx,' 'karlmarx,' ... 'belgium,' 'chocolate,'
'godiva,' 'naked,' 'breast,' 'cunnilingus,' 'fellatio.'
This is really, really, really funny.
|9.24.07 @ 3:50PM|#
Yes, men are rats.
And women are fucking crazy
Actually, I think the second line should be "Woman are beavers"
|9.24.07 @ 3:59PM|#
I read that hoping for the reviewer to take down Pollitt for her frivolous excess, her narcicism, her inability to distinguish what happens to her, personally, from the rest of the universe. Alas, I was reminded why I no longer read the Times' Book Review section.
|9.24.07 @ 4:11PM|#
GWB: "Is someone saying it is not ok to secretely go through
another persons email?"
Hey, Dubya, keep your secretions off my mail.
"You know why cannibals don't eat divorcees?
Too bitter."
A lion in the jungle finds a camp with a writer scribbling
furiously in his notebook while his colleague is reclined reading a
book. The lion immediately pounces on the latter, for he knows that
writers cramp but readers digest.
|9.24.07 @ 4:17PM|#
Episiarch,
Yes, that had me ROFL. No straight guy even knows how to spell
felashio, much less use it as a password.
stephen the goldberger|9.24.07 @ 4:24PM|#
So exactly what's the point of MCM's post again, aside from
him being threatened by feminism?
The point is that the feminist and marxist movement, once so vogue
has become laughable and narcissistic. Its at the heart of
libertarian ideology that empowerment is about individual
empoowerment not the empowerment of specific groups like "women" or
"men" or whatever group you wish to define.
Episiarch|9.24.07 @ 4:24PM|#
No straight guy even knows how to spell felashio
Sure we do, it's spelled H-U-M-M-E-R.
One thing I found super funny was that it seemed it should be
her password list--it's political bullshittery, chocolate,
and sex.
|9.24.07 @ 4:34PM|#
One thing I found super funny was that it seemed it should
be her password list--it's political bullshittery, chocolate, and
sex.
Exactly and all in terms used by a girl with an Emily Dickinson
poster on her bedroom wall.
Fluffy|9.24.07 @ 4:46PM|#
Maybe Pollitt figured that perpetual bitterness that not all men
find her so attractive that they abase themselves before her worked
out pretty well for Maureen Dowd and Naomi Wolf, so she thought
she'd give it a shot.
Seriously, almost every Dowd column and Wolf book has as its
subtext "Michael Douglass didn't think I was hot enough" or "Every
last guy at Yale didn't want to lick my feet". Maybe Pollitt wants
to crack into that market.
|9.24.07 @ 4:59PM|#
Why are so many she man men hating feminists such patheticly clingly stalkers in their private lives and relationships with men? Jeez talk about your over compensation. This woman sets herself up for so many sick mysogynistic remarks (the best of which were given by Warren early in the thread).
|9.24.07 @ 5:03PM|#
Fluffy,
I am surprised that the male staff at the Times hasn't drawn straws
to send someone anyone up to Dowd so she can get laid. I guess they
don't becuase they figure she would have nothing to write about
anymore.
Wolf is a piece of work to. She got famous by arguing in the Beauty
Myth that it is horribly unfair that women have to live up to
ideals of beauty but then readily admitted in interviews that she
was not above using her looks to get ahead.
Episiarch|9.24.07 @ 5:06PM|#
Why are so many she man men hating feminists such patheticly
clingly stalkers in their private lives and relationships with
men?
Reverse your sentence, remove the "why", and you have your
answer.
I don't want to over-generalize, but much of the man-hating comes
from women whose hearts have been broken. Like racists, they can't
separate one person's behavior from the whole gender.
|9.24.07 @ 5:09PM|#
Many women have a lot to complain about.
Pampered denizens of the Yupper West Side? Not so much.
|9.24.07 @ 5:10PM|#
"I don't want to over-generalize, but much of the man-hating
comes from women whose hearts have been broken. Like racists, they
can't separate one person's behavior from the whole gender."
There is a lot of truth to that. Also, they tend to be smart nerdy
girls who probably never got asked out in high school and were
called lesbians by the cool girls. No kidding. It is amazing how
people let their experiences as adolescents color their entire
subsiquent lives.
Episiarch|9.24.07 @ 5:12PM|#
She got famous by arguing in the Beauty Myth that it is
horribly unfair that women have to live up to ideals of beauty but
then readily admitted in interviews that she was not above using
her looks to get ahead.
What looks? I am consistently amazed at how fucking ugly or plain
some of these people are, yet how delusional they are about their
looks. At least Dowd is moderately attractive and was probably more
so when younger. But Klein?
Fluffy|9.24.07 @ 5:30PM|#
Epi -
When Wolf was younger, she was definitely OK. And I imagine when
she was in the Ivy League, she was pretty hot.
But that's the problem. Her subsequent views seem to have been
colored by the fact that she was the sort of lily white upper class
Ivy girl who is just attractive enough and accomplished enough that
she expects every last high-status male she meets to fall to her
feet, and develops an eating disorder when they don't. The
perfectionism and sense of entitlement of upper middle class white
females runs under everything she's ever written.
Guys who don't get the women they think they "deserve" in college
just compensate by trying to make a lot of money, and then getting
a mulligan on the whole adolescence thing in their late 20's. Women
don't really have that option so they develop paranoid neuroses
about Madison Avenue instead.
Episiarch|9.24.07 @ 5:39PM|#
Shit, I seem to be confusing Klein and Wolf (too much Naomi
going on), but neither of them is anything better than an
unenthusiastic "OK" at best.
I think that at some point, maybe starting with daddy, somebody
tells "princess" that she's beautiful, and she believes them. And
then the real world hits and they get angry--and bitter--because
they aren't beautiful.
Bummer.
|9.24.07 @ 5:47PM|#
Women don't date their peers. They inevitably think they deserve
men with greater achievements than their own.
I think the 'all men are scum' thing comes from who they choose to
date. They set the bar so high that the only the most dedicated
liars are able to clear it. Once a woman decides to give her heart
to a man, she makes a commitment and doesn't look back. So once the
smooth talking hustler moves in, he can keep winning her back over
and over as his bullshit is revealed. Until at long last (seven
years!) she finally wakes up to the fact that the scumbag has been
taking advantage of her from the get go. Their response to the
experience? Why set the bar even higher of course. No honest guy is
ever given the time of day.
|9.24.07 @ 5:56PM|#
'breast,' 'cunnilingus,' 'fellatio
How about tits, eattin' at the y, and blow job? No wonder he left,
she doesn't know shit about men.
|9.24.07 @ 6:02PM|#
So I read Moynihan's breathless "OMG THIS CHICK'S NUTZ!" post
complete with repetitive use of the phrase "beyond parody," and I
get certain expectations. Lord knows, Reason loves to bring up
left-wing goofballs
And I get to the end, and I go "Eh."
Michael, I think you need to get out more.
|9.24.07 @ 6:16PM|#
Warren, I'm an honest guy and don't have trouble meeting women. Perhaps there are other issues that are holding you back from meeting that special someone? Just throwing that out there for ya.
|9.24.07 @ 6:22PM|#
From the LA times article:
. . . although her essays are funny, she makes the left look
like a series of silly cocktail parties.
Oops.
Jennifer|9.24.07 @ 6:41PM|#
The worse I behave, the faster he runs away. What a jerk he
is.
Just for fun, anyone want to guess what Pollitt's reaction would
have been had she learned her ex had broken into her e-mail
account?
|9.24.07 @ 7:06PM|#
Just for fun, anyone want to guess what Pollitt's reaction
would have been had she learned her ex had broken into her e-mail
account?
Ooh, ooh. Pick me please!
"I felt I had been raped!"
How'd I do Jennifer?
|9.24.07 @ 7:07PM|#
Dan T.,
I believe the point of the post is
"Golly, leftitsts! Look at 'em!
They should be ashamed."
Fluffy|9.24.07 @ 7:15PM|#
No, no, Joe.
The appropriate thing for a concern troll to do at this juncture in
the thread is write, "Look at all the misogyny in here! No wonder
all women hate internet libertarian geeks!"
|9.24.07 @ 7:29PM|#
joe,
Are you implying that it is typical for women to try to hack into
their exs' e-mail accounts and fantasize about murdering them (and
the new girlfriend in the bargain)?
|9.24.07 @ 7:45PM|#
mitch,
Heaven's, no!
Pollitt is hardly typical. I don't think anyone has accused her of
that.
|9.24.07 @ 7:55PM|#
So I read Moynihan's breathless "OMG THIS CHICK'S NUTZ!"
post complete with repetitive use of the phrase "beyond parody"
.... And I get to the end, and I go "Eh." ... Michael, I think you
need to get out more.
Joe, this post wasn't for you. In fact, most of the stuff here
isn't for you. It doesn't matter what you thought of it. It doesn't
matter what you think of its author. It doesn't matter what you
have to say about it. It's not for you.
This blog, in fact, isn't for you. You're free, of course, to elbow
your way in here all the time and "spark debate." That's fine,
that's cool, whatever. But to have reached the point where you
actually think you're entitled to judge the worthiness of the
content here, as if Hit & Run is for you, is to have become a
bit delusional.
Hit & Run is for other people. You're just an antagonist.
Simply being familiar here doesn't mean this is now your home.
You're still an outsider. I hardly ever step out of lurk mode and
yet even I belong to this place far more than you do.
|9.24.07 @ 8:27PM|#
I disagree. This place is for joe. This is, after all, the
internet. People rarely post in agreement of anything; they post
when they want to fight about something (this post included). If
joe wants a steady supply of things with which he disagrees, he's
not going to find it at Kos or wherever hippies hang out these
days. And if he wants an environment in which people (with whom he
disagrees) will post basically reasonable, usually profanity-free
responses to him, he's not going to find it at freerepublic, or
wherever wingnuts hang out these days.
The options are limited. This is one of the only places that meets
the criteria.
That said, the 'what was the point of this post?' thing that keeps
coming up has outstayed its welcome. Don't come to a place with
which you intend to disagree and be surprised that you do
not see eye to eye with the proprietors -- even in such minor areas
as 'what's post-worthy?'.
|9.24.07 @ 9:06PM|#
Damn Warren that is the best post you have ever made. You are exactly right. I am sure Wolf and Politt in their 20s would only talk to men who had tons of money, good looking and never had a thought that was politically incorrect. Well, no one is really like that, so the only ones who made it through were bullshit artists and good ones at that. The honest men got weeded out when they admitted that owning a gun wasn't that bad or that maybe it is possible for a women to lie about being raped or perhaps men are generally more interested in playing sports than women.
|9.24.07 @ 9:10PM|#
Not to mention, she's a little nuts, and seems to be attracted
to men who are a little nuts, too.
I suspect the fireworks are better explained by personality than
ideology.
|9.24.07 @ 9:13PM|#
No, no, Joe.
The appropriate thing for a concern troll to do at this juncture in
the thread is write, "Look at all the misogyny in here! No wonder
all women hate internet libertarian geeks!"
funny, i would say just that.
James Quentin Clark|9.24.07 @ 9:17PM|#
I appreciate Pollitt and her ilk. They strengthen my belief that
feminism will become completely irrelevant sometime during this
century.
The Upper West Side is sort of like the San Franciso of New
York.
Holy crap, that is so disgustingly true.
Syloson of Samos|9.24.07 @ 9:40PM|#
mitch,
For a significant percentage of the human population I'd say yes (I
can't comment on Pollitt as I haven't read her book or anything
else she has written for all I know).
|9.24.07 @ 9:41PM|#
Pollit is so far out one occasionally cannot help but wonder if
she isn't some sort of right-wing plant. Rush Limbaugh himself
couldn't have come up with a better thing to poke fun at.
I recall reading a column of hers stating that Dennis Kucinich
couldn't carry the banner of the left because he was pro-life. A
couple of weeks later Dennis decided he had "grown" and she decided
he was okay after all.
|9.24.07 @ 9:45PM|#
If Ms. Pollitt had one ounce of ability to laugh at herself,
this accident could be avoided. I've always considered myself an
equity feminist, but I'm embarrassed to say that the
"feminist/change lightbulb" joke is often painfully
true.
How does it go?
Jennifer|9.24.07 @ 9:49PM|#
How'd I do Jennifer?
That'll do for a start, but you need to expand upon the original
idea. Could this behavior on the SOB's part be proof of male
intimidation at the thought of a woman with a formidable intellect,
for example? Or some macho belief in his sexist role as some sort
of overseer?
Either possibility can be explained via an expansion of your
initial rape analogy.
Jennifer|9.24.07 @ 9:50PM|#
How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb? THAT'S NOT FUNNY!
|9.24.07 @ 10:12PM|#
"Why would you choose to advertise your lifelong fear of
driving when it reinforces old stereotypes about female ineptitude
and ditziness?"
Actually, it reinforces old stereotypes about Manhattanites'
ineptitude in regular America. I'm sure Politt, like many long time
New Yorkers, secretly wears her fear of driving as a badge of pride
- no real New Yorker ever drives. If you're poor you take public
transport, if you're rich someone drives you.
Amy Alkon|9.24.07 @ 11:15PM|#
They strengthen my belief that feminism will become
completely irrelevant sometime during this century.
It already is. The feminists are the last to know.
|9.24.07 @ 11:30PM|#
(Professional) Feminists are victims of their own successes. All of the big battles have been won. I think the only reason for the continued existance of capital "F" feminists is that the battles were won on a cultural, not a political level. Since they view everything through a political lens, they don't believe they can claim victory and move on to doing something productive.
|9.25.07 @ 8:04AM|#
Just for fun, anyone want to guess what Pollitt's reaction would have been had she learned her ex had broken into her e-mail account?
Yeah, no shit. She would have had a whole new password list:
castration, dickless-tracy, empty-sack, nuts-in-a-bowl...
|9.25.07 @ 8:12AM|#
Syloson of Samos,
He's not saying it isn't, he's saying don't bitch about the posts.
If you aren't interested in the topic, don't comment about how
worthless the post is, just ignore it.
Besides, that really shouldn't have been directed at joe. He often
questions the motives of the poster, but rarely argues that
something should not have been posted in a misguided attempt to
manage the ideology of the overall blog, like fucknuts always
does.
Anyway, just for fun, check out the competition...
Feministing
thread on the Pollit interview.
(hint: anal sex comes up a lot.)
Episiarch|9.25.07 @ 8:59AM|#
Feministing thread on the Pollit interview.
(hint: anal sex comes up a lot.)
That made my day. And it's early yet!
|9.25.07 @ 9:07AM|#
Dan T.,
I believe the point of the post is
"Golly, leftitsts! Look at 'em!
They should be ashamed."
I'm thinking it's an exapansion of Reason's master plan to not just
alienate women with children from libertarianism, but women in
general.
|9.25.07 @ 9:13AM|#
(Professional) Feminists are victims of their own
successes.
And everyone else are the beneficiaries.
|9.25.07 @ 9:26AM|#
Episiarch,
It's sort of the anti-Hit n' Run. I never post there (I'm too
polite to post in a forum that would never want me there), but it
has a trainwreck quality I can't turn away from.
Episiarch|9.25.07 @ 9:29AM|#
It's sort of the anti-Hit n' Run. I never post there (I'm
too polite to post in a forum that would never want me there), but
it has a trainwreck quality I can't turn away from.
I already knew about feministing (is the whole "fisting" thing
intentional or is my mind just in the gutter?). There are many
women who are great to discuss all kinds of things with.
These women are not them.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 9:32AM|#
That Feministing piece was quite interesting.
So sexist, so predictable. Sometimes it seems like women are
criticized just for having the audacity to speak the truth about
their own lives.
No, I'm just appalled by some fiftysomething woman portraying
herself as a feminist role model whilst behaving like a 13-year-old
who thinks that if her boyfriend loses interest in her, it's part
of a worldwide male conspiracy to keep women down. Women in Iraq
are forced to wear burkas, women in Afghanistan are denied the
right to education, and Katha Pollitt's boyfriend dumped her. Boo
fucking hoo.
|9.25.07 @ 9:40AM|#
These women are not them.
What I was getting at (if it wasn't clear.) Disagree with them once
or twice and the bannening is quick and without appeal. Just like
it is here... oh, wait...
|9.25.07 @ 9:44AM|#
No, I'm just appalled by some fiftysomething woman
portraying herself as a feminist role model whilst behaving like a
13-year-old who thinks that if her boyfriend loses interest in her,
it's part of a worldwide male conspiracy to keep women down. Women
in Iraq are forced to wear burkas, women in Afghanistan are denied
the right to education, and Katha Pollitt's boyfriend dumped her.
Boo fucking hoo.
I'm with you on this one, Jen. Pollitt should write about real
injustices that modern American women face, like having to pay
taxes and eat in smoke-free restaurants.
|9.25.07 @ 9:54AM|#
Jennifer complaining about Pollitt complaining about men, when
there are other women who have an even bigger reason to complain
about men.
I'm going to Moe's.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 9:58AM|#
Jennifer complaining about Pollitt complaining about men,
when there are other women who have an even bigger reason to
complain about men.
Joe pretending there's no difference between "I am feeling hurt
because my male romantic partner left me" and "I am feeling hurt
because my patriarchal oppressive government won't let me learn how
to read, and threw acid in my face after I went outside without a
burka."
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 10:00AM|#
Request for advice, in case reincarnation is real and in my next life I come back as a male: how can a man break up with his girlfriend without that being interpreted as evidence of a patriarchal plot?
|9.25.07 @ 10:01AM|#
There are also a great many women who like and appreciate men in
general, and vice versa.
I don't consider angry feminists as represntative of women, just as
I don't consider Al Sharpton to represent blacks, David Duke to
represent whites, etc.
Joe, however, does seem to represent liberals :->. That is meant
in a friendly way.
|9.25.07 @ 10:03AM|#
How dare you write such a glib, self-referential post, when
there are people starving in Africa?
Some of whom are, presumably, female?
|9.25.07 @ 10:04AM|#
Request for advice, in case reincarnation is real and in my next life I come back as a male: how can a man break up with his girlfriend without that being interpreted as evidence of a patriarchal plot?
Tell her that you met this very attractive, intelligent bi-sexual
woman and you want to have a threesome. Then wait for her to break
up with you.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 10:09AM|#
Tell her that you met this very attractive, intelligent
bi-sexual woman and you want to have a threesome. Then wait for her
to break up with you.
No, that will be interpreted as the selfish patriarchal belief that
one woman isn't enough for a man. All I want to know is how a man
can make romantic decisions without turning it into something
political.
Also: in the past I've broken up with men who wanted to continue
dating me. Was I being an empowered female, or part of an
oppressive anti-male plot? Would the answer be different if I broke
up with him after breaking into his e-mail account? What if I put a
GPS device on his car so I can always be appraised of his
whereabouts?
|9.25.07 @ 10:17AM|#
how can a man break up with his girlfriend without that
being interpreted as evidence of a patriarchal plot?
In the immediate (2-3 week) aftermath: There's nothing you can do.
You are the enemy.
Most women will move on, however, before you've gotten married.
Others (like Pollitt) will not. Do your best to only date only the
former.
|9.25.07 @ 10:19AM|#
All I want to know is how a man can make romantic decisions
without turning it into something political.
Easy. Don't date left-wing nutbags.
|9.25.07 @ 10:23AM|#
Jennifer,
When you are a man, everything you do leads back to the patriarchy.
In the next life, just be as gay as you can. They will be too
paralyzed by political correctness to attack you.
Here's a fun game, whenever you read a rant about The Patriarchy,
mentally replace "The Patriarchy" with "Telepathic Squid from
Tuscon." See if the rant doesn't become the same paranoid shit
muttered in mental institutions everywhere.
Also, Feministing's Two-Minutes-Hate about Ron Paul last week was
like peeling back the layers of a crazy onion.
|9.25.07 @ 10:23AM|#
Jen, it is only taken into a political realm when you break it off with an angry, morose feminist. So, the best advice is to only date psychologically stable, intelligent, attractive women.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 10:34AM|#
Jen, it is only taken into a political realm when you break
it off with an angry, morose feminist.
Sounds like her version of "feminism" is the solipsistic belief "As
a woman, I am entitled to anything I want, and if I want something
I can't have that's a patriarchal plot."
Episiarch|9.25.07 @ 10:38AM|#
Request for advice, in case reincarnation is real and in my
next life I come back as a male: how can a man break up with his
girlfriend without that being interpreted as evidence of a
patriarchal plot?
Just tell her you need to go watch some gay porn to get your hate
back. Works wonders.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 10:40AM|#
Jennifer, we get it - you're not one of "those"
women.
Most women aren't. However, I'm curious to know how Pollitt thinks
that the way to improve the lot of women overall is to make men
think that all women--or at least the intelligent,
independent-minded ones--are needy, clingy, whining psychopaths who
find nothing wrong with trying to invade their loved ones' privacy
to assuage their pathetic insecurities. With the addendum, of
course, that all women are sisters who must Stick Together so if
another woman dates a man you've not yet grown tired of it's cool
to fantasize about killing her.
Episiarch|9.25.07 @ 10:49AM|#
Jennifer, it's understandable that you are annoyed by people
like Pollitt, but most guys wouldn't go near her with a 1000' pole,
not just because she's a pig but because she's a narcissistic
sociopath.
Find me a man (or at least non-metro/homosexual man) who read her
book, and I will show you the type of douche who would date her.
They deserve each other.
Anonymo the Anonymous|9.25.07 @ 10:51AM|#
Either possibility can be explained via an expansion of your
initial rape analogy.
The problem starts when Pollitt was forced into using the
phallocentric protocols of e-mail. It's right there in the name! No
shame for the patriarchy!
dhex|9.25.07 @ 10:57AM|#
maybe i'm overly tolerant - my brain rotted by too much
libertine libertoidingness or something - but the whole trying to
break into his email thing didn't strike me as that insane. people
do paranoid and desperate things when they're in love with someone
who doesn't love them the same way. and the harder you squeeze
something, the more it slips through your fingers.
that said, hit and run is generally not the spot i go to for
enlightened comment section banter about men and women - too many
bitter divorcees/virgins/lawd knows what.
dhex|9.25.07 @ 10:59AM|#
and yeah the comments section of feministing is not where i go
unless i want to see women being really mean to other women because
of political/social differences.
"blood stained underpants" i mean c'mon guys.
Episiarch|9.25.07 @ 11:01AM|#
"blood stained underpants" i mean c'mon guys.
Stoney and I would go over to Buckle's and Puff would turn us on to
a hot load of mescaline crumbled into a tumbler of ether with a
float of Percocet jimmies. I'd wake up with blood on my ass, and
then we'd get high. Those were some good times!
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 11:05AM|#
the whole trying to break into his email thing didn't strike
me as that insane. people do paranoid and desperate things when
they're in love with someone who doesn't love them the same way.
and the harder you squeeze something, the more it slips through
your fingers.
Yes, but extrapolating your romantic peccadilloes into a Great
Feminist Cause is bullshit. I've dated my share of losers in the
past, but they were just that: loser individuals. Damned if I'm
going to hold all of Malekind responsible for them.
If I ever date a black guy who Does Me Wrong, should I use thence
become a male-hating sexist, or a black-hating racist? Oooh,
decisions, decisions. Damn feminisim for giving me more scary
Choices than mah li'l ol' self can handle.
dhex|9.25.07 @ 11:12AM|#
Yes, but extrapolating your romantic peccadilloes into a Great
Feminist Cause is bullshit.
is she actually doing that? i didn't get a sense of much of a
tie-in here.
and after reading the book review, outside of the reviewer's
distaste for this particular segment, she seems to like pollit's
work, generally.
more to the point, we've all done batshit crazy stuff out of love,
right?
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 11:16AM|#
is she actually doing that? i didn't get a sense of much of
a tie-in here.
Either that, or Pollitt has suddenly developed an ability to laugh
at herself and her insanity:
She relishes the moment when he will betray his new girlfriend
(he marries her, fingers - his and ours - crossed) and attempts to
read his e-mail by guessing his password
dhex|9.25.07 @ 11:22AM|#
yeah that seems like normal bitterness to me.
then again i had a woman try to kill me with her car (and before
that, a frying pan) so my baseline for crazypants (pantalones locos
for our friends in the MexicanGovernment) might be set a little too
high.
|9.25.07 @ 11:26AM|#
For somebody who "has not and will not read the book", Jennifer is quite the expert on the personality and motives of Katha Pollitt.
|9.25.07 @ 11:30AM|#
"Request for advice, in case reincarnation is real and in my next life I come back as a male: how can a man break up with his girlfriend without that being interpreted as evidence of a patriarchal plot?
it's all good if he converts to homosexuality
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 11:36AM|#
then again i had a woman try to kill me with her car (and
before that, a frying pan) so my baseline for crazypants
(pantalones locos for our friends in the MexicanGovernment) might
be set a little too high.
Ummmm, yeah. Nutty jealousy because you love someone more than he
loves you is not an excuse for trying to break into his e-mail,
anymore than it's an excuse for a big scary oppressive patriarchal
Man to stalk his ladylove. And fantasizing about murdering someone
who's dating the one you want for yourself might be normal
for a ditzy 13-year-old who still has a lot to learn about how to
be a grown-up, but not for a grown woman who's trying to portray
herself as some feminist role model.
Huh. The one time, back in college, I ran into an ex whom I hadn't
yet got over and his current amorata, I smiled and acted very
charming and friendly to them both, especially to her. A minute's
worth of chatting followed by my making an excuse for why I had to
end this enjoyable conversation to go elsewhere. I figured that was
more dignified than screaming "Get away from my man, you bitch!" or
whining "Please oh please oh please take me back."
I guess I was doing it wrong.
Stephen the Goldberger|9.25.07 @ 11:41AM|#
i already explained earlier why this post is on here and why feminism is the enemy of libertarianism. It's about collectivism and pride in belonging to a group (women) instead of being empowered by your own ability and gifts as a human being (and a woman).
|9.25.07 @ 11:51AM|#
i already explained earlier why this post is on here and why
feminism is the enemy of libertarianism. It's about collectivism
and pride in belonging to a group (women) instead of being
empowered by your own ability and gifts as a human being (and a
woman).
But really, how many self-described libertarians don't join groups
or identify themselves members of some sort of collective?
The very fact that you're using the internet means that you're not
living the Unabomer lifestyle.
|9.25.07 @ 11:58AM|#
Uh, the Unabomber lifestyle isn't a libertarian ideal.
We libertarinas often love technology. We'll even use
government-tainted technology if it's what we can get. (I know a
girl who drives a Volkswagen; amazingly, she isn't politically a
Nazi.)
And there's a difference between voluntarily joining a group to
interact with like-minded people, and making membership in a
particular group the center of your life, your self-image, your
politics and your sense of right and wrong.
|9.25.07 @ 12:00PM|#
Oops. "Libertarinas" was supposed to be "libertarians," but I
think I accidentally invented a sexy-sounding term for female
libertarians.
The male form, "libertarino" sounds kind of cool too.
What hath typo wrought?
Stephen the Goldberger|9.25.07 @ 12:00PM|#
But i don't espouse a mentality that it's key for an arbitrary group (women) to express their dominance and superiority over another arbitrary group (men). The other reason that this post is on here is that it exposes a fundamental flaw with old school feminism that it's about ignoring one's true feelings and beliefs (like the desire to look pretty, the desire to have children, the desire to want men, etc) in order to swear allegience to a morality that's self defeating. Pollit shows herself to be highly emotional and jealous over a man, if that's not a symbol of old school feminism's failure and total ignorance of human nature then i don't know what is.
dhex|9.25.07 @ 12:05PM|#
actually old school feminism would be more in line with your
thinking.
you're probably thinking of second wave feminism.
dhex|9.25.07 @ 12:06PM|#
which isn't necessarily any more or less inimical to a smaller state, mind you, beyond the politics of those involved. (a la the whole immigration thing; anti immigration folks don't necessarily have to support the inflation of the state, they just happen to in this incarnation)
|9.25.07 @ 12:25PM|#
I dated a girl, off and on, for about 7 years - starting in
college. Nearly half a decade since I gave up on that relationship
later - and almost that long since I've spoken to her - she still
publicly blogs about me (sometimes with lengthy posts about
something she came across in an old journal or whatever).
She's not even a professional feminist, which leads me to believe
that Pollitt's feminism isn't really the issue here, either.
Special joe tie-in to this post...
asdf is right, posts on HNR are not intended for an audience
comprised of guys like joe.
isildur is also right on one incredibly salient point: HNR is one
of the few places outside the collective hive mind that people of
joe's political persuasion can behave rudely and post profane
insults while only infrequently encountering reciprocal tactics.
(On HNR, joe actually has a (some of them grudingly so) group who
applauds his "gadflying" and "sparking debate."
But that doesn't make joe any less of the kind of guy that the
Greeks bought a round of hemlock for, it just means that folks here
are considerably more tolerant than folks like joe.
stephen the goldberger|9.25.07 @ 12:37PM|#
i applaud joe for sparking debate, and disagree with asdf. To
say "this stuff isn't for joe" is moronic. If Joe thinks it's worth
reading and commenting on then it is for him.
And the ultimate reason why this post is on here is that reason is
about cultural and social issues and feminism is one of them.
As to Joe and Dan T's response essentially that being against
"feminism" = being against "females". No, you're wrong.
|9.25.07 @ 12:42PM|#
To answer Jennifer's question a bit late, I have found that
women generally are much better at "getting on with their lives"
than men. They might have a more explosive short-term reaction, but
they seem better at closing the door on such unpleasantness. I
think that explains why the classic stereotype of a psychotic,
stalking ex is a man, not a woman. Men who are emotionally wounded
don't get over it very easily.
That said, I never really dumped a girlfriend when I was single, so
I'm probably not the best person to answer.
|9.25.07 @ 12:44PM|#
To more accurately answer Jennifer's question, I would guess the least troublesome way to break off a relationship is to act sufficient asshole-ish so that the ladyfriend leaves you and thinks she's doing herself a favor. Takes a strong hide to do that, though.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 1:02PM|#
To more accurately answer Jennifer's question, I would guess
the least troublesome way to break off a relationship is to act
sufficient asshole-ish so that the ladyfriend leaves you and thinks
she's doing herself a favor. Takes a strong hide to do that,
though.
Nope, still doesn't work, because the guy's asshole behavior will
be extrapolated to all men, and we're right back to "evil
patriarchy GAAAAH!"
|9.25.07 @ 1:26PM|#
Nope, still doesn't work, because the guy's asshole behavior
will be extrapolated to all men, and we're right back to "evil
patriarchy GAAAAH!"
Yeah, you're right. It's probably a hopeless quest. A good option
for a man is probably to make sure that he's not dating a psycho in
the first place, so that all of the 'evil patriarchy' anger doesn't
turn into action.
A better option is to (a) not be an asshole in the first place, and
(b) make sure the woman is compatible before you get serious. I'd
like to think that's how I never had to initiate a break up and
ended up happily married.
On the other hand, I think there is a certain subspecies of woman
who desperately craves unhappiness. This Pollitt character seems to
fit that type.
|9.25.07 @ 1:53PM|#
Basically, the moral rule here is that it's not okay to make generalized observations about men, but it is okay to make generalized observations about feminists.
|9.25.07 @ 1:56PM|#
Remember the "do me" feminists. Now, that is my brand of feminism. They genuinely like men, they are intelligent and independent. That is my kind of woman.
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 1:58PM|#
It's a memoir. It's not a manifesto.
The memoir of a middle-aged woman who tries to protray herself as a
bold feminist heroine despite having the mentality of a solipsistic
13-year-old. I hope most people who read it don't assume that's
standard behavior for women in general or independent ones in
particular.
I think there is a certain subspecies of woman who desperately
craves unhappiness. This Pollitt character seems to fit that
type.
There is indeed. But I wish such people wouldn't hold themselves up
as feminist role models. Trying to break into a man's e-mail is
appallingly dishonorable behavior, no matter how her apologists
wish to spin it.
|9.25.07 @ 2:00PM|#
"Basically, the moral rule here is that it's not okay to make
generalized observations about men, but it is okay to make
generalized observations about feminists."
Yeah, pretty much.
|9.25.07 @ 2:36PM|#
The memoir of a middle-aged woman who tries to protray
herself as a bold feminist heroine despite having the mentality of
a solipsistic 13-year-old.
Imagine what Jen could tell us about the book if she actually had
read it!
Jennifer|9.25.07 @ 2:51PM|#
but it is okay to make generalized observations about
feminists."
No, but it IS okay to make generalized observations about women old
enough to know better who nonetheless try to break into their
boyfriends' e-mail accounts, and fantasize about murdering him and
his current love.
|9.25.07 @ 3:24PM|#
Jennifer,
1) How do you know how she is trying to portray herself?
2) Have you ever read a memoir? The good ones keep the embarrassing
and naughty bits in there.
|9.25.07 @ 3:25PM|#
No, but it IS okay to make generalized observations about
women old enough to know better who nonetheless try to break into
their boyfriends' e-mail accounts, and fantasize about murdering
him and his current love.,/i>
Such as, that's what feminists are like.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245