Seriously, huh?Posted: March 2, 2008
I have read many stupid things in my life. But I believe this piece of shit written by Charlotte Allen and published by the Washington Post is literally the fucking stupidest, least analytical thing I have read in my entire life.
It’s a strange piece mixture of a mindless bitching, hit piece on Obama and Clinton, and a sexist rant (let’s not forget a smidgen of racism; “Clinton finally fired her daytime-soap-watching, self-styled ‘Latina queena’ campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle, known for burning through campaign money and for her open contempt for the “white boys” in the Clinton camp”).
Consistently Allen’s piece boggled my mind, ; “Could she really be arguing this?” “What the fuck does Grey’s Anatomy have to do with anything?” “How the hell was published by the Washington Post?” By the end I was completely baffled, not by the strength of her argument but by a desperate search to find her argument.
Seriously what is a thinking person supposed to make of a set of paragraphs like this:
Women ‘Falling for Obama,’ ” the story’s headline read. Elsewhere around the country, women were falling for the presidential candidate literally. Connecticut radio talk show host Jim Vicevich has counted five separate instances in which women fainted at Obama rallies since last September. And I thought such fainting was supposed to be a relic of the sexist past, when patriarchs forced their wives and daughters to lace themselves into corsets that cut off their oxygen.
I can’t help it, but reading about such episodes of screaming, gushing and swooning makes me wonder whether women — I should say, “we women,” of course — aren’t the weaker sex after all. Or even the stupid sex, our brains permanently occluded by random emotions, psychosomatic flailings and distraction by the superficial. Women “are only children of a larger growth,” wrote the 18th-century Earl of Chesterfield. Could he have been right?
I’m not the only woman who’s dumbfounded (as it were) by our sex, or rather, as we prefer to put it, by other members of our sex besides us. It’s a frequent topic of lunch, phone and water-cooler conversations; even some feminists can’t believe that there’s this thing called “The Oprah Winfrey Show” or that Celine Dion actually sells CDs. A female friend of mine plans to write a horror novel titled “Office of Women,” in which nothing ever gets done and everyone spends the day talking about Botox.
Seriously, after reading those paragraphs my mind was left painfully blank, unable to even think of snark or pith to mock such outrageous stupidity. Ok. Except… Lord Chesterfield? Really? Lord Chesterfield?
Things get worse when we get to the “crux” of her “argument”:
Depressing as it is, several of the supposed misogynist myths about female inferiority have been proven true. Women really are worse drivers than men, for example. A study published in 1998 by the Johns Hopkins schools of medicine and public health revealed that women clocked 5.7 auto accidents per million miles driven, in contrast to men’s 5.1, even though men drive about 74 percent more miles a year than women. The only good news was that women tended to take fewer driving risks than men, so their crashes were only a third as likely to be fatal. Those statistics were reinforced by a study released by the University of London in January showing that women and gay men perform more poorly than heterosexual men at tasks involving navigation and spatial awareness, both crucial to good driving.
The theory that women are the dumber sex — or at least the sex that gets into more car accidents — is amply supported by neurological and standardized-testing evidence. Men’s and women’s brains not only look different, but men’s brains are bigger than women’s (even adjusting for men’s generally bigger body size). The important difference is in the parietal cortex, which is associated with space perception. Visuospatial skills, the capacity to rotate three-dimensional objects in the mind, at which men tend to excel over women, are in turn related to a capacity for abstract thinking and reasoning, the grounding for mathematics, science and philosophy. While the two sexes seem to have the same IQ on average (although even here, at least one recent study gives males a slight edge), there are proportionally more men than women at the extremes of very, very smart and very, very stupid.
So wait, women have only .6 more car accidents than men (per million miles driven ), are less likely to take driven risk than men, and are thus less likely to have fatal accients and somehow women are worse drivers than men?
Are is she really employing the same sort of arguments that were used to prop up slavery and racism?
A little bit of Googling shows that this isn’t the first time Allen has been given a valuable platform to spout uselessness.
Honestly, I can’t see why the Washington Post published this. Its a terribly written piece. It’s a mixture of tired mocking of politicians she dislikes (Clinton & Obama), bashing of pop-culture she doesn’t like (Grey’s Anatomy & Eat, Pray, Love), and used and abused social science (the stats on men/women & driving).
And, oh yes, racist, sexist, discredited brain science.
I think someone needs to explain to Allen that just because some bit or piece of pop-culture you dislike is popular doesn’t mean the world (or your sex) is doomed. Difference in taste is not the apocalypse.
Really, the whole piece reeks of just being an opportunity, given to her by the Washington Post, to allow Charlotte Allento bitch and that’s a complete waste of valuable intellectual real estate.
She should just get a goddamn blog.