Via the loveliness that is Twitter, I came across this article, entitled "The Truth About Why Some Women Hate Sarah Palin". And I think my head exploded. I'm by no means a political genius, and I'm still rather new when it comes to the language of feminism, bias, etc. One of the women at SP could probably write a killer article about this, but I'm just going to stick my oar in anyway.

The author starts out with a valid premise: why is the appearance of a woman so important? Why are so many comments made about Palin's "slutty flight attendant" outfit (or Michelle Obama daring to wear shorts in summer while on vacation in the freaking desert)? It's a serious issue, but this women just goes about it all wrong from the second paragraph:

"We’ve all heard the phrase glass ceiling, but I’m here to tell you that it doesn’t exist. The proverbial glass ceiling is nothing but a myth. It is an excuse for the behaviors that women exhibit that set our entire sex up for failure. We, and we alone, are responsible for this notion that a beautiful woman cannot be politically successful and effective."
Really? Men are completely innocent in this, huh? Nothing's holding women back but the rest of us catty, catty bitches? I'll remember that the next time a man thinks I'm incompetent and boy, will I be glad you were "here to tell me" the glass ceiling doesn't exist.
"If we want to be taken seriously, we feel that we must emasculate ourselves."
(You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.)

Next, we're treated to a recap of the Katie-Couric-cut-her-hair crap, which I personally had enough of when it was happening. But where I really decided this woman is off her rocker was when she compared women to crabs. Yes, crabs:
"The truth is that women, as a sex, are akin to crabs. You can catch one crab, place it in a bucket, and soon it will claw its way out to freedom. But if you catch two crabs and place them in the bucket together, you are golden. Crabs, like women, do not allow one another to advance in life."
What was that? I was busy grabbing another woman's skirt with my pincers--can't let the bitch get ahead, you know. Oh, now we're talking about women's hair again? Okay. Let's hear about how Hilary Clinton was "allowed to champion the feminist cause because she had short hair." Not, you know, because she's a smart, headstrong, accomplished woman. And being married to a president had nothing to do with her success, because it's not a man's world and men aren't holding us catty, catty bitches back.

The author goes on to reiterate that women are the ones who "allow" this to be a man's world, and that attacking other women over matters of appearance is counter-productive. The second is certainly true. I was almost starting to think maybe this article had some redeeming features, when suddenly I was bitch-slapped back to reality:
"Let’s not lie any longer to ourselves. We do not empower one another by aborting our children, or fighting for the rights of others to do so. Most of us don’t know anything about Planned Parenthood other than what we’ve been told to think. Someone tells us they are empowering women, so we think that they must be."
You know, you are so right! I've never once had a single thought in my jealous, shallow little brain about this. I've never gone to Planned Parenthood for birth control; I've never had to pass anti-abortion picketers to get there. I've never wondered what I'd do if I got pregnant, and pondered what that situation would mean. I've never thought about it and been glad I wouldn't be helpless if I ended up pregnant. All I know is that they're! empowering!! women!1!! (/end non-sequitor) What were we talking about?

This whole article just blows me away. In defending the idea that an attractive woman can be successful and intelligent, Nichols ends up reverse-shaming women who chose to appear less "feminine". She blames women for the state of the world--while stating that women blaming women is why the world is as it is. And she then wraps up her entire argument by telling us to remember that Ronald Regan looked like a doofus.

I think we're done here.

0 Responses