Media Sexist Advice Columnists Suck
posted by on March 5 at 9:28 AM
And, no, I’m not talking about me.
Backstage at Talk Sex last night with time to kill (thanks to that four hour call), I picked up Friday’s edition of the Toronto Sun. The Sun runs two advice columns: the phoning-it-in-from-Mars “Dear Abby” (now written by the original Abby’s adult daughter), and “Dear Val,” a column I’d never run across before. “Dear Val” is written by Valerie Gibson, a sixty-something looker.
The first letter in Val’s column on Friday was from a woman who is—can you guess?—furious with her husband. You see, four years ago the woman’s husband announced that he was “no longer interested in sex,” without giving a reason. “In the last six months I’ve lost a lot of weight and worked hard on getting fit and suddenly he wants to restart our sex life!” The woman is resents the fact that her husband “couldn’t love me the way I was before,” and has decided, now that their kids are grown, to get a divorce. Val’s response?
You’ve worked at getting fit and are at the weight that feels good and you’re seeing your life more clearly than you have before…. Consult a divorce lawyer to see where you stand financially and what divorce will mean for you.
Okay, fine, whatever—I tell people to break up all the time. Perhaps Val should have mentioned that the wife bears some small responsibility for the breakdown of her marriage. Yes, her husband didn’t give her a reason for his loss of interest in sex, but what was he supposed to say? “Honey, you’ve put on a lot of weight”? Men are constantly told—by their wives, by Oprah, by advice columnists like Val—that a statement like that is the third rail of heart-to-hearts. The exact same professional advisors that urge honesty in all things warn men that they’re absolutely, positively not allowed to be honest about that. The same professional advisors that urge us to own and honor and share our feelings tell men that they’re absolutely, positively not allowed to feel that. That brand of candor—that honesty—will land your ass in divorce court about as quickly as an affair.
Oh, and speaking of affairs, the last letter in Val’s column is from a man who believes his wife has cheated on him—multiple times. His kids are grown, and he’s also contemplating divorce. “She has always denied having affairs but I have quite a lot of evidence to the contrary. I want her to be honest with me so our marriage can continue.” Val’s advice? The man shouldn’t divorce his wife—he shouldn’t even confront her with the evidence of her infidelities, as that would put his wife between “a rock and a hard place,” leading her “to deny everything.” No, he should look to the real culprit—himself.
What you really should be doing, if you’re convinced of her guilt, is asking yourself why she needed to have affairs (assuming your evidence is substantial), what went wrong with your marriage, and why you didn’t satisfy her.
Uh… gee. Couldn’t something similar be said to the wife in the first letter? Something went wrong with her marriage too. The first woman’s weight gain—there I said it—made her unappealing to her husband. She no longer satisfied him—and his lack of attraction wasn’t about her age, but her size. Did her husband cheat? Nope, he just lost interest. And now that she’s lost some weight, he’s interested again—and this is capital offense, proof that he in fact doesn’t love his wife. Divorce his ass! But when a wife cheats on her husband? Repeatedly? And he has evidence that confirms his suspicions? Well, says Val, the husband was clearly doing something wrong! He must have failed to satisfy her in some way, which means her infidelities are his fault!
It’s a wonder that men write to advice columnists at all. So many are like Val: whatever the problem, whatever has gone wrong, it’s gotta be his fault.
Perhaps her prejudice is that it's always the man's fault, but more likely I think is that she buys into the notion that somehow you aren't responsible for your own phyiscal fitness but are responsible for your own psychological or emotional fitness. So the woman who comes to resemble a blanc-mange is not to blame for this, while the man who somehow ceases to satisfy his partner emotionally is somehow to blame. In other words it's ok to get fat and one's partner should be able to accept that, but it's not ok to become cold or uncaring, etc.
The problem here I think is not a feminine prejudice against men, but an over-intellectual take on what attraction really is. But it's probably the case that women are more likely to engage in this sort of thing. That's just a limited empirical observation though.
Or she just assumes all her readers are women.
Comment 2 wins. Thread over.
If all of her readers are women how does she get letters from men? Men wouldn't write her if they weren't reading her.
I would amend comment 2 to read: "She assumes all her readers are women are totally whipped men."
"...AND totally whipped men."
It's not that men don't read her column, it's that she probably assumes her primary audience is women, hence she slants her advice in that direction.
Wow. There needs to be an advice columnist for advice columnists. She sucks ass.
Yeah, many advice columnists and TV personalities - Dr. Phil is another example - just know where their demographic is (married or looking-to-marry women) and know how to tell them what they want to hear. Props to you, Dan, for not tailoring your advice to reaffirm well-established cognitive biases.
this dovetails nicely with mr. mudede's slog from last week - about the grand narrative of the straight man.
you fuck them till they come, then you fuck them till you come. don't mention fat, don't mention facial hair, don't mention feminine odors.
see, women are just too delicate to be able to handle the criticism they dish out. a ridiculous state of affairs
Some are, some aren't. Same goes for men. Most people who are happy to dish out criticism can't hear it about themselves, gender totally aside. The whole "never-tell-your-girlfriend-she's-fat" thing really does a disservice to both sides.
On the up side, this column made me realize that my guy (horrifically honest in all other ways) was never going to just tell me if I was getting too big for him. So I asked, point-blank. And got an honest, if somewhat discomfited answer. About time! So thanks, Dan! And I hope the show went well - Sue Johanson's an awesome lady.
You know what would have made the trifecta? If she had compared transgendered people to Freepers. That would have been awesome.
the golden aura vagina - sum,
men are so horny for sex they pay any price
gosh, Dan, so simple, can tell you are a true fag
the spell/quest of the vagina does not occur to you, or if so, not with the intensity which drives straight men to the edge
ask charles
gay men beat off and go to sleep
dan, just for fun and the hell of it you should send this blog piece to val, and the comments too.
Didn’t we just let Master Pastor Mark Driscoll have it with both barrels for implying that pastors’ wives’ fatness could cause their Gawd fearing hubbies to ride the baloney pony?
Granted he implied that the alleged fatness would push these hubbies into the arms of macho, macho men instead of their female glassy-eyed supplicants, but still. Consistency, please.
Dear Val is what the Columbus Dispatch used to replace your column, Dan, when they bought out Columbus Alive. There is no comparison, ergo, here I am, coming to the source.
My reaction to the second letter is that many people assume that men and women have different reasons for cheating. Men supposedly cheat because they're not getting sex at home, they're no longer attracted to their wives, or because a hotter piece of ass came along. Women supposedly cheat because they're emotionally neglected.
There might be some truth to that logic (it's possible that many women require an emotional connection for good sex more so than men), but it's still bullshit to make excuses.
Another goddamn reason why I don't read the Sun.
this column made me realize that my guy (horrifically honest in all other ways) was never going to just tell me if I was getting too big for him. So I asked, point-blank. And got an honest, if somewhat discomfited answer.
This is all well and good, but what I don't get about women is why they even have to ask. I mean, unless you have some serious anorexia/body dismorphic disorder, the fact that you are wondering whether you are too fat means that you are probably too fat.
Why put both of you through the pain of making the poor guy say it? You know, he knows it. Either do something about it or don't. Sitting there and forcing him to admit just seems kind of cruel.
i don't get it -- someone refuses to have sex with their spouse for FOUR YEARS and never says why, and telling the partner to leave the non-fucking/non-talking spouse is sexist? since when??!!
also, i think the columnist has a enough sense to tell the reader what she wants to hear. if she wanted her husband back, she would be thrilled that he was paying attention to her again. but she started falling out of love and moving on at least four years ago. she was getting in shape in order to move on, not to move back to the not-fucking/not-talking lump. she sought "permission" from an outside source that was still another woman from her own generation. i think the advise was perfect, and the mode of delivery suited the audience.
the second one -- can't tell as much, you gave less info. but i think she was rightish too, his letter is all "i can't decide" and she says, look harder at yourself and decide.
i may not like her writing or share her readers' concerns, but she clearly knows her audience and is giving them the advice they want in a flavor they can choke down.
refuses to have sex with their spouse for FOUR YEARS and never says why, and telling the partner to leave the non-fucking/non-talking spouse is sexist? since when??!!
Was it not obvious that the "sexist" accusation here had to do with the columnist advising a woman that her husband's lack of sexual interest in her wasn't her failing but his, while suggesting to a man that his wife's sexual interest in other men WAS his failing and not hers? In the same column, no less?
"in the same column, no less?" yes, truly shocking! horrifying -- mon dooo!
tsm: did you miss that dan said he'd never heard of her or read her column before? so two out of two doesn't really say much about anybody.
i still maintain she told each person what they wanted/needed to hear. she wanted/needed to hear "leave" and he wanted/needed to hear that he needed to grow up and decide -- he can't decide if she cheated and he can't decide what it should mean and the advice was, "figure it out/figure you out." you don't go around confronting spouses until you are sure you want to leave or have the big awful run through that will keep you together, it's not something to do in the navel gazing phase.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).