Well, the flow of the conversation didn't go in a direction I was very interested in, and I didn't get too many words in edgewise, but overall I don't think I embarrassed myself. I had jotted down a couple sentences in case I just had an opportunity to randomly opine:
If we accept that this is a serious problem, the inevitable result is a loss of freedom for young women and a shift to thinking that feminism is based on a guarantee of comfort and safety rather than an assertion of equality and fundamental rights.
This article in the Post is part of a genre of post-modern damsel in distress stories about how our highest achieving young women are still unhappy. It is an extension of the "you can have it all" ethos that says women should be able to perfectly balance work and family, traditional and modern roles, to be sexy but not sexual.
Young women are not only being taught that they must have a perfect body, they are being taught that if they achieve that, they'll only acquire a new set of problems. They can't win.
Overall, I'm more interested in how the Post covered the story than the situation itself, which is a little too meta for talk radio, even on the BBC.
After the initial shock wore off, I sorta felt the same way about this - I couldn't muster up a whole lot of sympathy for her. Granted there's a ton of pathetic jerkoffs out there fueling this, but she'll end up with a ton of opportunities from this whole thing.
You're right about no winning on the web Tom - if you're sexy you get exploited and if you're ugly or fat you get demeaned.
Amish girls have it sooo good, they don't even know it...
Post a Comment