Monthly Archives: February 2014

Sexism is So Confusing!

I haven’t watched the show, but I skimmed this review. I admire Paskin’s moxie but I find myself increasingly uncompromising about my feminism as I age.

Call this the Girl with the Dragon Truism Theory.

If you have to question whether or not a work filled with misogyny is sexist or if it’s instead critiquing sexism, can’t you just go ahead and call it sexist?

Conversely.

If you want to make a piece of art critiquing sexism, maybe you want to try not to fill it up with women getting abused, mistreated, insulted and exploited?

It can’t be that hard. Geena Davis has some ideas. You could apply them to race, too, and cast a person of color into a central role that was written “neutrally,” i.e. for a white character.

I know that refusing to portray women as prostitutes, sexual abuse survivors, and trophies can risk the bottom line. It’s risky! To cast a black woman as the lead in a show about a doctor.

Risky!

But give it a shot. Maybe you’ll like how it feels to critique society’s dumbness by not being dumb.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , ,

This N That (Late to Brunch)

Hey friends.

Boy, do I miss this blog. Carving out time, if I can, to review the first of this trilogy. Meanwhile, some linkity-loos.

Continue reading

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When Writing Teachers¬†Read NY Times Op-Eds

I have told students for 10 years.

I have witnessed its verity for 15 years.

I have practiced it for 20 years. Or tried to.

Strong, clear writing indicates strong, clear thinking.

Sputtering, erroneous, ranty writing—especially from one who for several decades has made a fat living with his writing—indicates sputtering, erroneous, ranty thinking.

I believe Dylan Farrow anyway. But from a purely rhetorical perspective, she wins.

Tagged , , , , , ,
%d bloggers like this: