The rise of hugely insufferable women, By Mark Morford

Not all grown men are suave, sexy, progressive George Clooney/Viggo Mortensen/Colin Farrell lookalikes with sharp blue eyes, stubbly outgrowths and abs like World Cup forwards, all hearts of gold, full heads of hair and perfectly sculpted genitalia custom designed to satisfy a small harem, make birds sing and goddesses purr.

Not all adult men are strong and dependable, loyal and true, able to make you laugh, sigh, moan, buy you a drink, jump start your Mini in the rain, smell good all over, build a deck, parallel park a tractor-trailer, and feel sufficiently secure in their masculinity and humanity to champion gay rights and women's rights and pelican rights.

Conversely, not all men are of the other ilk either, the sweaty, overweight, woman-hating Republican homophobes in titanic SUVs, bad marriages and sad comb-overs, twitchy fearmongers who hate all foreigners and wear their baseball hats and grubby hoodies in fancy restaurants, men who spit on the sidewalk and blow their noses like open trumpets into the street, immature adulterers as eager for a war and a beatdown as they are for 20 minutes with a meth dealing gay hooker.

Did you already know all this about men? Does it seem forehead-slappingly obvious to suggest, despite all the clichés, lousy track records and Tiger Woods, that men come in such a huge array of shapes, styles and configurations? ...


(Full URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/06/23/notes062310.DTL&nl=fix)

My excerpt:


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2010/06/23/notes062310.DTL&nl=fix#ixzz0rg5JhEAg

It ignores the contributions of the "insufferable men" he describes to helping all this happen, to helping these "insufferable women" rise.

He also ignores the basic inequities between men and women that have contributed to the rise of this kind of woman.

What he seems to be saying is: "Hurray, women are finally equal with men in our society! The downside? There are now just as many obnoxious powerful women as there are great powerful women--and just as many as there are obnoxious men."

Well, it's not really true that women are finally equal in our society. And there aren't as many obnoxious powerful women as there are obnoxious men. It's just that so many of the obnoxious women are reaching positions of power. And part of the reason they are successful in doing so is the sexual double standard that they are so expert at playing off. They are masters of convincing everyone that they combine the best of Smart & Capable with Sexy & Sassy and Barefoot & Pregnant. They don't represent any new female paradigm. They're just modern reiterations of very old ones.

The cliched "woman who can rule the world with an iron hand and still keep her frail and gentle dainty womanliness intact, and who goes around preaching the importance of same to all other women" is nothing new. Not really.

Also women who rise to positions of power tend to emulate the behaviors of powerful men. I think rather than saying that powerful women or powerful men are especially obnoxious, it is more likely that having and using power tends to exacerbate the worst qualities in some of the people who seek it out and hold it. The old saying, "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" may apply.

Good article -- and you added to it.

get back to me when there are 50% of women serving in congress, when there's a female american president (that will be NEVER), when there's 15% women CEOs

john lennon had it right even tho what he said can't any longer be posted on this board w.out getting banned (IMAGINE that, if john lennon had lived, he'd be tombstoned from DU...)

we don't earn equal money, we are expected to raise the brats and STFU

yes palin and coulter are asses but maybe that's the only way they can make $$$ is to be asses, why are these people even given publicity? it's the fault of america at large, because women are "cute" if they have an opinion...

i'm tired of men making money writing on women's issues while actual you know women with a vagina are starving/going homeless/hustling/playing poker to raise a dollar

men get the money by being men and then they get the money from the women's movement by being all sympathetic and shit to women...real women get the kick in the ass...sick of it, frankly

if you have a daughter, her most likely way to make money will be to be a stripper or to marry a guy who can earn money, whatever she earns will be bullshit by comparison, but most people don't even love their daughters enough to care... or blame their daughters for not being hillary clinton and prob. hillary clinton's parents are still mad that she somehow didn't get elected president even tho she had an IMPOSSIBLE row to hoe


we blame ourselves and our daughters for the system, but if our sons get in trouble, we suddenly say, "hey, the man doesn't give our son a chance."

again..sick of this shit... truly sick of it.

That's EXACTLY what makes me cringe when I see such women celebrated.

The article has a tone of condescension. Where does a man get the right to dictate rules for women, such as "This is the rule: You do not ever get to say you're any kind of feminist or champion of women and mothers everywhere, and in the same breath add that you also believe no woman should have control over her reproductive powers and, by the way, poor immigrant women should be sent back to Mexico and guns should be legal for all."

IMO feminism -which I fought hard for in the 70s- actually allows women to be what we want to be. And if some want to be the female version of 'jerks' it's sort of what the movement was all about. I don't LIKE to see women behaving like the worst of men. I don't like Meg Whitman (a real meany), Carly Fiorina or Sarah palin. But feminism was about empowering women. And if I don't share the 'pro-life' POV, that's OK too. Because the feminist movement was never about enforcing any uniformity of opinions on any issues.

Thanks.

Unfortunately, he's right. If we say we want all women to have the full range of options open to us in life, then yes, some of us are going to take a very wrong turn and call it good.

edit: looks like BrklynLiberal snipped the same section I loved.

Rec

:rofl:
Go, Mark!

they, therefore, do not suffer from the lack of that ability.

So there's no actual changing insufferable women and their insufferable pep-squads. We should turn our efforts elsewhere.

The feminist movement has been based on college campuses and major coastal cities for a while. So, it's no surprise to see an alternative movement among conservatives, rural areas and women without a grad degree.

I think what we're seeing with Palin is that there are many women who would like to vote for a woman (and may see it as a feminist act of empowerment) but who still identify more strongly with the conservative values of their family and community. The only surprise is that it took conservatives so long to exploit that.

I'm glad the author points out the ridiculousness of arguing that the world would be just right if we only put women in charge. That's sexism, not feminism as I understand it. I don't think many people buy into the kind of academic sexism that defines all positive attributes as feminine and negative ones as masculine.

Maybe after we have a female President we can abandon the mentality that someone's rise to power is good or bad based on their gender and evaluate everyone on an individual basis in a gender neutral way. Hopefully it doesn't take an American version of Margaret Thatcher to drive the point home.

i am always bothered when i hear mostly women say this. anyone in power, of either gender, can abuse power. being female is not the fix aLL.

like Steinem said last night on colbert, it has never been about a winner and loser, always about equal.

It's my pleasure to post what Morford has to say. I've sent him links to the DU on a few occasions just in case he may want to see what/who we are I think he would fit right in with us.

Co-opting and perverting...he got that right.

is to co-opt it, no?

:hi:

I think the writer is on to something. Very interesting take and I think accurate.

But i think the real feminists have been on to these pseudo-feminists for some time. Elisabeth Hasselbeck is another such fake feminist who clearly hasn't fooled her Left leaning co-hosts from the get go.

The author of the article named it, though.

therefore that this thread was going to be about Sarah Palin.