Democratic Diva

21 Oct 2008 07:34 pm
Posted by: Donna

Mm hmm.   http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/21/davis-feminists-palin/

BENNETT: I don’t know which drives them more crazy. Let me give you three things that I think drives them crazy, and you don’t have to comment. That’s she’s very attractive. That she’s very competent or that she’s very happy. You know, as a human being.

DAVIS: Yeah, all of the above.

As a card carrying liberal feminist, I’m not terribly bothered when pendejos like Bennett and Davis think they’re insulting me. You see, like any good Gen X third wave feminazi I’ve got a dogeared copy of The Beauty Myth on my bookshelf. Naomi Wolf’s unsparing analysis and indictment of our culture’s obsession with female appearance and the arbitrary and unattainable physical ideals imposed on women came at a time in my life (early 20s) when the pressure to conform to it was never more intense. Reading that book shifted my perception to the extent that I was never able to view any concession I made to the mandate – from dieting to working out to putting on lipstick – in a non-political context ever again.

It’s not that I threw off the shackles of feminine appearance maintenance, not by a longshot. Like most women, I’m a realist and a rational actor. I realized that refusing to shave my legs, color my hair, or wear makeup could severely limit my social and economic options. Like most feminists, I find myself walking a fine line between doing what I need to do to get by in the world and selling out my convictions and self-respect. Plus, there’s an undeniable enjoyment to be had in adorning yourself, whether or not you’re doing it for male approval or professional advancement. I think many of y’all reading this can relate. It also goes to show just how clueless misogynistic asswads like Davis and Bennett really are. They define “feminist” strictly as, “ugly women with hairy legs who have failed to be successful sex objects”*. They also seem to be blissfully unaware that women who identify as feminists marry and have families on a fairly regular basis.

This leads me into the most important thing the book did for me, which was to reveal how beauty standards often have a lot more to do with desired behavior from women than they do with natural attributes. It is for this reason that what is considered “hot” will vary somewhat (within a limited range). When I was a teenager buff blondes like Heather Locklear and Madonna were all the rage. Later it was statuesque Cindy Crawford, who was displaced for heroin chic waifish Kate Moss. By the time I was in my early 30s, curves and ethnic diversity held sway – enter J-Lo and Rosario Dawson. Yet the one constant throughout is that whatever the desired “look” is, ordinary women will find it nearly impossible to mimic it without resorting to time-consuming, uncomfortable, and downright painful practices. High heels, “foundation garments”, grueling workouts, cutting calories drastically, cosmetic surgery, etc.

If you manage to pull it off for a while, time marches on and you are never allowed to forget how short your shelf life is. Even if you are pulling it off (and have been given a special extension for being a “MILF”) your status still depends upon being properly submissive to the patriarchy. This is how the Beauty Myth works. It gives every man a cudgel to wield over every woman, no matter how “beautiful” she is, or not. In fairness, there are many, many men who don’t buy into it. But for those who do, like Davis and Bennett, it provides them with an outlet to express their misogyny and a way to emotionally blackmail women into obedience. Sarah Palin, the feisty MILF, vigorously upholds the status quo.  She is no threat to the to the patriarchy and serves as an example of compliance to hold over other women.

The other reason that I’m not personally bothered by Davis’ and Bennett’s comments is that I know they weren’t directed at me. As stupid as those two bozos are, they are not dumb enough to believe that self-identified feminists like me are going to be browbeaten into supporting Sarah Palin. They are hoping that there are millions of women who, despite embracing feminist ideals such as equal pay and reproductive choice, are still loathe to call themselves feminists because of the way the term has been denigrated. They are hoping to persuade them to embrace Palin as an alternate role model. They are hoping that the threat of calling women “ugly” will bring them into line.

As if.

They either haven’t noticed, or are willfully ignoring, the fact that Palin started out with high favorability ratings with women. Those ratings have been dropping like a stone. Sorry guys, but women recognize a reactionary pig in a retrograde poke. Even if she’s pretty, and wearing lipstick.  That goes for you too, John McCain.  Dissing “the liberal feminist agenda”, as you did in recent campaign rallies, helps you about as much as mocking women’s health at that last debate did.  Which is to say, not at all.  Women will use their votes, en masse, to repudiate you.  And Sarah Palin. 

Donna

*Not that there’s anything wrong with that. 

2 Comments

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website