Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Re: The Politics of Color-Bala... | The Bright Side »

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Charlotte Allen Proves Her Point, Kind Of

posted by on March 5 at 13:47 PM

Charlotte Allen—the anti-feminist writer who penned a piece for the Washington Post titled “We Scream, We Swoon, How Dumb Can We Get?” arguing that women are “dim”—did a live chat with WaPo readers earlier this afternoon. Although most of the questions were on point, not insulting—e.g., “If men are better drivers, why do insurance companies charge them more?”—Allen’s answers were disappointingly dodgy (and, as if to prove her point, kind of dumb). Asked why women’s self-indulgent pastimes (Grey’s Anatomy, “Eat, Love, Pray”) are evidence that they’re stupid while men’s equally mindless pastimes (James Bond, porn) demonstrate nothing, she responded, “I agree that many men do many dumb things, and many men have dumb tastes.” She also continued to defend her relentlessly unfunny op/ed as “humor,” asking defensively, “Why can’t a woman make fun of women?” And she revealed that: She doesn’t know when women get the vote; she reveres the “macho men” fighting in Iraq; and she doesn’t believe it’s possible that women who fainted at Obama rallies could been suffering heat exhaustion.

RSS icon Comments

1

Blah, blah, blah...

Posted by Boring | March 5, 2008 1:51 PM
2

I really can't stand anti-feminist women, despicable traitors

Posted by vooodooo84 | March 5, 2008 1:58 PM
3

I can't stand columnists. Especially when they're given an additional soapbox to pontificate from.

Posted by Ziggity | March 5, 2008 2:00 PM
4

Her answers aren't dumb. She's a snarky smartass. A two dollar Ann Coulter. Who does she remind me of...?

Posted by elenchos | March 5, 2008 2:07 PM
5

I would love to see Charlotte Allen and the like receive a verbal ass-kicking from Janet Shibley-Hyde, or pretty much anyone who has done a meta-analysis of gender differences.

Posted by lauren | March 5, 2008 2:13 PM
6

i'm a little torn on this. she's making fun of women using mostly negative stereotypes of women. this should be okay, really, like catholics making fun of priests. or any group making fun of their own group. the problem is, that many people still believer these stereotypes, and repeating them perpetuates them. i don't know, i guess mature people can handle them because, as with any joke, they understand the truth behind it. the laughter she's going for isn't because women are inept or inferior, but rather a laughter of what she believes is shared experience. kind of like if you made a joke about a human trait. some people would laugh, others wouldn't, based on their experience.

Posted by infrequent | March 5, 2008 2:16 PM
7

ECB: Charlotte Allen is an idiot, but (to be fair) a lot of smart women (and men) have trouble identifying exactly when women got the vote. Clinton wavers on that one too, her speech where she said her mother "could remember when women couldn't vote" was completely wrong since they'd been voting in the state of Illinois since 1913 and the 19th Amendment was proposed the year she was born.

Posted by Jason | March 5, 2008 2:17 PM
8

this is not like Chris Rock making fun of black people, This is like Clarence Thomas doing so and making sure that the only reasonable inference from his "humor" is that white people are inherently superior. the logic of the KKK

Posted by vooodooo84 | March 5, 2008 2:22 PM
9

She wouldn't take either of my two questions.

No, it's not ok.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 5, 2008 2:28 PM
10

Agreed etc, but the driving tidbit was pretty interesting. And obvs, men get charged more because they crash more because they drive more, though they crash less per mile driven.

Posted by Eric F | March 5, 2008 2:38 PM
11

Agreed etc, but the driving tidbit was pretty interesting. And obvs, men get charged more because they crash more because they drive more, though they crash less per mile driven.

Posted by Eric F | March 5, 2008 2:38 PM
12

@8. i like what you have to say, but hope you can expound upon it. seriously. i don't know the history of this charlotte, but i don't want to have an ill-informed opinion.

what makes that different between clarence and chris? and what makes charlotte a clarence and not a chris?

Posted by infrequent | March 5, 2008 2:45 PM
13

@12,

Allen has a long anti-feminist history. The comparison to Clarence Thomas is completely fair.

Posted by keshmeshi | March 5, 2008 2:50 PM
14

@12 she is using these arguments to perpetuate a political agenda, not to make a humorous but stereotypical point about a general group of people

Posted by vooodooo84 | March 5, 2008 2:53 PM
15

i see, thanks for the clarification on that.

Posted by infrequent | March 5, 2008 3:28 PM
16

Q: so, how many feminists does it take to put in a light b--
A: THAT'S NOT FUNNY!!

Posted by unPC | March 5, 2008 4:08 PM
17

@10 - I thought it was because they frequently do the shopping and other household trips even when they don't feel well, and tend to live longer, so they're driving with slower reactions, on meds, and worse eyesight than the men who died earlier.

But hey, statistics ...

Allen is an abomination.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 5, 2008 4:25 PM
18

Allen says:
"I don't think that women are at all discouraged these days from careers in math and science, gently and subtly or otherwise"

What universe does she live in?! I was pretty unhappy with her article, but the more I read from her, the angrier I get. Women don't face any problems/sexism/discrimination because Charlotte Allen doesn't see any? yuck.

Posted by lost in dc | March 5, 2008 7:45 PM
19

We all know as a general rule, most *people* are incredibly stupid. The exceptions are few and far between and range the gamut as far as race and gender goes. If you aren't (or don't think you are) one of these retards, just laugh and move on... Or just plain old move on...

Posted by Queen_of_Sleaze | March 5, 2008 9:46 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).