Maureen Dowd has written a very harsh criticism [http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/102205A.shtml] of her colleague at the NY Times, Judy Miller, for the latter's role in propagating the US administration lies about WMD in Irak and her connection with Scooter Libby who allegedly revealed the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame. Dowd is not the first, nor the last, to criticize Miller. But because she is a woman, her criticism has been described by other columnists as «catty».
A man can call an actress «a talentless bimbo», or a female singer «a skanky slut» and his opinion will be duly considered valid. People may disagree with him, but that's his opinion and it's just as good as anyone's. If I, however, as a woman, say that I don't find Cameron Diaz that pretty or that Julia Roberts does not deserve an Oscar, cause whatever role she's in, she can only play Julia Roberts, my judgement is immediately suspect and any comment I make on female celebrities will be greeted by derisive feline onomatopoeias and offers of «a saucer of milk with that?». From men. The women simply either agree or disagree.
To summarize: male opinions on other males or females = ok; female opinions on other females = boo! meow! Conclusion: Women are not entitled to a rational acceptance of their opinions, by virtue of their gender.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment