Thanks for nothing, Feminism!

 Yesterday Jenn Floyd Engel, Fox Sports Columnist wrote an article about how outraging it is that Tiger Woods' mistresses are writing a book about their sexual exploits with the golf superstar.

The super popularity of "socialites, the girls whose rise to fame started with a sex tape", "The Real Housewives", and mistresses is sending girls the wrong message about "what it is to be truly successful, truly powerful, truly famous."

I actually agree with Engel here. I think that being famous for nothing sends a bad message, but I tend to think that it's equally damaging for girls and boys -- boys, as much as girls, learn how to comport themselves through popular media. This is where our similarities end.

Engel seems to think that women have gotten to this point because of feminism. I could be wrong, but it just seems like Engel goes from making a feminist argument to a blame feminism argument really quickly and it doesn't really make sense because if you read the comments under her article she gets attacked constantly just because she's a woman writer.

"Long live feminism, baby" she writes after describing the many "career moves" that Tiger Woods' mistresses have made. To be perfectly honest though, I don't really think that  feminist culture produced the Howard Stern Mistress Beauty Pageant and I have to say that I don't know many feminists who consume Tiger Woods' themed pornography. In fact, I don't know many feminists or even any progressively minded human being that watches and enjoys Celebrity Rehab.

Engel thinks that the Rush Limbaugh "slut" controversy wasn't really about using the word slut but rather a reaction to Limbaugh saying it.  "Listen to how Bill Maher talked about Sarah Palin, or the lyrics to that Soulja Boy "Superman" song that plays at many arenas?" 

 At the same time that she recognizes how saturated with sexism popular culture is, she ignores the work that is being every single day to combat normative sexism. Despite what she says, the reaction to Limbaugh saying "slut" wasn't "disingenuous": after an organized, intelligent, and thoughtful campaign against the use of the world slut Limbaugh lost 58 advertisers from his radio show. This is exactly the kind of work that is happening all of the time, although usually it doesn't get any kind of media attention.

"What I am afraid this Tiger tale has done is reinforce for young girls that their chance of being famous is better sleeping with Tiger than being the Tiger of their chosen profession. There certainly is less vitriol hurled at the women sleeping with Tiger than say Sarah Palin, Hillary Clinton or even a young female private citizen testifying before Congress about birth control."

Engel fails to mention that there are countless articles calling these women sluts and whores, they're not just handed golden goose eggs and being patted on the back. Where's the slut-shaming for Tiger? Who really cares that he cheated on his wife? It's not really anyone elses business, but he has sex with a bunch of different women and he's just a man? They're sluts and whores, but he's just Tiger Woods.

"Of course, young girls are confused....We are selling study hard, promise rings and you can be whatever you want and then talking about and watching and paying big bucks to girls who do otherwise."

This is what really got me.  Promise Rings? So, to be a successful and powerful woman you have to be chaste and adhere to the principals of heteronormativity? Give me a break. Young women are confused because they're told they have to save their bodies for the man they will marry some day and if they don't, they're sluts. Young women are confused because they're sluts for sleeping with more than one person, but the same behaviour is celebrated when men do it. Young women are confused because they're told that if they're good they'll be safe and happy but then they are gang raped and murdered. Young women are confused because they're told to speak their minds and then they're bullied or harassed for being too smart. Young women are confused because people who attack them rarely face punishment for their words or actions. Young women are confused because they're told their whole lives that strangers are dangerous, but then they're abused by their families or partners. Young women are confused because they are never taken seriously. Personally, I am confused as a young woman when I write a blog about something that has nothing to do with my profession(Women's Studies) and I receive comments like this:

 

Sexless, Joyless, Perpetually Offended, Resentful. Young women are confused because their hard work gets automatically slotted into these categories instead of considered thoughtfully. If you scroll through the comments under Engel's article you'll find a bunch accusing her of being a joyless, sexless creature as well - nobody escapes it and isn't that worse then some ladies writing a book about being mistresses to someone famous?

A 2011 study on National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey was released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the U.S. The numbers from the study were compared to statistics on smoking with jarring results: sexual assault and violence is more common, statistically, than smoking in the United States.

Paris Hilton and the Real Housewives of Beverley Hills are the least of young women's worries right now and if a certain writer was really so offended and morally outraged by these kinds of trends then maybe they would quit their job with the enormous corporation responsible for disseminating that garbage. Engel writes her article to "chicks only": her "team" needs some real talk because "we are still embarrassing ourselves." What I find embarrassing is that a writer with such a wonderful and wide-ranging platform would start to explore something interesting and then cop-out and make it a feminist bashing party.

FoxNews cites a source more reliable than itself: The Onion

the fox nation website published a story in its "culture section" that they got from the Onion. The Onion!

the headline reads: "The Onion: Frustrated Obama sends nation rambling 75'000 word email"

the "story" reads as follows:

"Having admittedly "reached the end of [his] rope," President Barack Obama sent a rambling 75,000-word e-mail to the entire nation Wednesday, revealing deep frustrations with America's political culture, his presidency, U.S. citizens, and himself.

The e-mail, which was titled "A couple things," addressed countless topics in a dense, stream-of-consciousness rant that often went on for hundreds of words without any punctuation or paragraph breaks. Throughout, the president expressed his aggravation on subjects as disparate as the war in Afghanistan, the sluggish economic recovery, his live-in mother-in-law, China's undervalued currency, Boston's Logan Airport, and tort reform."

maybe it's time to get a new website intern, foxnation...

for all of our friends in north korea

most of us know that yesterday north korea killed four people(including two civilians) on a south korean island. this is horrifying for many different reasons--one being that tensions between the (communist) north korea and (not communist) south korea are always running high and people sometimes forget that.

it's important for politicians to react swiftly to news of north korea's attack on south korea, because they don't want people to start freaking out about north korea's nuclear capabilities etc.

so thank the lord baby jesus that 2010 presidential candidate sarah palin was on the glenn beck radio show to soothe the public and prove just how great she would be as president of the united states.

when asked by beck how she herself would have dealt with the attacks, ms. palin responded:

"This speaks to a bigger picture here that certainly scares me in terms of our national security policy but obviously we've gotta stand with our North Korean allies."

yeah.... north korea is not one of america's allies.. in fact, north korea is one of the original members of the axis of evil. that's the opposite of an ally. but i mean, it's the radio and sometimes ladies can't remember facts off the top of their heads without having them written on their hands. she's a beauty queen not a nobel prize winner: pat the pretty bitch on the head, give her a cookie, and send her on to the next radio show content in knowing that she tried her "darn" hardest!

and why should she have to remember the difference between north and south? communist and not communist? ally or axis member? because she' wants to be the president? well.. that's just a double standard!! probably people are being so hard on her because she's a WOMAN!

or maybe just because she's stupid and always on the radio and tv and god only knows why people listen to her at all.

she was corrected by beck and continued the interview. glenn beck for president?

this woman is really stupid.

a couple of days ago michelle malkin, crazy fox contributor, posted on her blog about the new barbie which she entitled "barbie meets sharia."

apparently sotheby's will auction off barbie dolls wearing traditional islamic dress for a children's charity. i think the barbie dolls are actually quite interesting and, in my opinion, no worse than blonde haired/blue eyed barbie doll. women wear veils, head scarfs, hijabs, purdah, facial covering, etc. if there are barbies in the world, then barbie should reflect this.


malkin disagrees:

"no word yet on whether the dolls will be subjected to female genital mutilation or come with stoning pits in order to accurately represent their “diversity.”"

riiiiight.... because "accurate" portrayals of islam include female genital mutilation and stoning pits always and because burqa's are an unquestionable part of sharia law...

from now on barbie should be exclusively non offensive, like these ones: