Reply #5: What an arrogant male chauvinist pig -- I'm shocked

[Eloriel]

Pie fight ad
by kos
Sun Jun 5th, 2005 at 22:01:25 PDT

So over the weekend, certain segments of the community have erupted in anger over the TBS ad for their reality show, the Real Gilligan's Island. Apparently, having two women throw pies at each other, wrestle each other in a sexy, lesbianic manner, then having water splashed on their ample, fake bosoms is degrading to women. Or something like that.

Whatever. Feel free to be offended. I find such humorless, knee-jerk reactions, to be tedious at best, sanctimonious and arrogant at worst. I don't care for such sanctimony from Joe Lieberman, I don't care for it from anyone else. Some people find such content offensive. Some people find it arousing. Some people find it funny. To each his or her own.

But I am not Lieberman. I won't sit there and judge pop culture and act as gatekeeper to what I think is "appropriate", and what isn't.

And I certainly won't let the sanctimonious women's studies set play that role on this site. Feel free to be offended. Feel free to claim that I'm somehow abandoning "progressive principles" by running the ad. It's a free country. Feel free to storm off in a huff. Other deserving bloggers could use the patronage.

Me, I'll focus on the important shit.

p.s. And congratulations -- the more people have bitched about the ad, the more successful it has become. It is now the most successful ad in the history of this site, with close to 8,000 click throughs over the low-traffic weekend. And, now that you have demanded I respond to the ad, thousands more will click through to see what the big deal is all about.

Sometimes, the best way to kill something you disagree with is to ignore it.


Okay, ladies. Let's see if we can identify all the standard Patriarchal Defense techniques (which have been employed against us whenever we've raised OUR issues, probably throughout all of history) he used in his little whiney rant:

1. Ridicule:
Apparently, having two women throw pies at each other, wrestle each other in a sexy, lesbianic manner, then having water splashed on their ample, fake bosoms is degrading to women. Or something like that.

Uh, yeah. You bet it is, you jerk.

2. Trivialization:
Some people find such content offensive. Some people find it arousing. Some people find it funny. To each his or her own.

3. Dismissiveness:
Whatever. Feel free to be offended.

4. Shaming (a la "Whatsamatter, honey, cantcha take a joke?") and arrogant Put down:
I find such humorless, knee-jerk reactions, to be tedious at best, sanctimonious and arrogant at worst.

Wait a minute. This IS "Whatsamatter, honey, cantcha take a joke?" -- but with a sneer instead of a faux good-natured boyish or drunken grin. There's a little intimidation in his version. It's also trivializing and dismissive in tone and denotative meaning: aren't there bigger issues to be concerned about is really implied. And he's just frankly annoyed by our petty concerns.

5. More dismissiveness:
But I am not Lieberman. I won't sit there and judge pop culture and act as gatekeeper to what I think is "appropriate", and what isn't.

Equating it to mere pop culture rather than something (institutionalized sexism) which tangibly and demonstrably affects women's LIVES, including living and dying.

6. Huffing and Puffing and Being Boss Again:
And I certainly won't let the sanctimonious women's studies set play that role on this site.

Thus putting ALL women who were concerned in their sad and sorry little places. So THERE! Take THAT! (God, he begins to remind me of an abuser.)

7. More of Reasserting One Man's Proper Place in the Universe (threatening here to end the relationship) along with his favorite, Dismissiveness and Trivialization:
Feel free to be offended. Feel free to claim that I'm somehow abandoning "progressive principles" by running the ad. It's a free country. Feel free to storm off in a huff. Other deserving bloggers could use the patronage.

8. And even more of the trivialization and dismissiveness, drawn to a very fine point:
Me, I'll focus on the important shit.

See, girls? YOU MEAN NOTHING. Your concerns are nothing. There are REAL PEOPLE out there who have REAL ISSUES, and none of them are women.

THIS is not an "educable male," which is my term for men who may not be full-fledged feminists but are at least willing and interested to learn more and be supportive. That's the least I require of my circle of friends and acquaintances. if they've given me any indication they're not at least "educable," I spend very, very little time with them -- no more than absolutely required. Fortunately, my husband, son (of course) and brother all qualify.

THIS "not educable male" is, instead, fully entrenched in his sexist ways -- addicted to certain sexist attitudes and behaviors -- and absolutely unwilling to give up any more of them than he already (thinks he) has.