While I am in a bad mood

[deelaundry]

Here is a post in which I criticize the public statements of certain actors.

Lisa Edelstein has complained about fans harassing boyfriends of hers, because the fans want her to be with Hugh Laurie instead. That is a more than fair complaint, and any fans doing that need a life, and probably psychiatric attention.

With that said, she needs to stop egging people on by talking about how do-able she finds Hugh Laurie. The latest is an Ausiello interview in which she "jokes" about showing Hugh herself naked and asking which parts she needs to tone up in case they have a sex scene together (even though, as she says, the parts won't be seen on TV).

Such talk makes you sound like a person of loose morals, dear.

Lest you think I only scorn women for acting like horndogs, Robert Sean Leonard similarly grossed me out during an old interview, in which he said he enjoyed rehearsing for The Music Man with the chorus because the teenaged girls were hot. Ew, dude. Some thoughts should stay in your head.

Comments

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

Whore is a pretty loaded word for what sounds like normal publicity talk.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

I warned for criticism. And I didn't say she is a whore, I said that kind of talk makes her sound like one. In my opinion. She has given lovely and charming interviews. This wasn't one of them.

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

Well, I assumed it would be about RSL's latest moronic fluttering. If I had known what it was I honestly wouldn't have read it. It's still pretty loaded, dude.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

And calling RSL a moron is not loaded? Are some people off limits from having their statements criticized, while others are free game?

[m-supercomputer.livejournal.com]

Welll, see. The difference for me is that mostly when people call RSL a moron, there's a friendly/fond sort of air to it, you know? There's not as many teasing ways to use the word whore.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

And I'm not using it in a teasing way. I am using it to express my opinion that talking about wanting to show her naked body to her married co-star, on top of all the other talk she's done about how hot her married co-star is, makes her sound like a person who would offer up her naked body to a married co-star. So is there a less loaded word I should use for that concept? Trollop? Strumpet? Slut? Person of loose morals?

I fully agree that using "whore" for activities that are unrelated to prostitution/sex (e.g., "What a whore, criticizing somebody I like!") is incorrect, rude, and awful.

[m-supercomputer.livejournal.com]

I guess the main difference, then, is that I saw her interview as mainly just her joking around. It was joking around in a way I found kind of off-putting, but still. *shrugs*

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

r u srs

OK, I am putting down the shot glass and the copy of the S.C.U.M. Manifesto to seriously ask whether you can't see the irrelevance of this question. No, "moron" is not a loaded term. "Whore" is. And speaking as though you know the intimate details of Lisa E's, Hugh Laurie's (the actual adulterer, here), and Jo Laurie's lives while affirming that yes, you do mean "whore" because you're talking about sex, is a loaded kind of statement.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

I am not speaking as if I know the details of anyone's life, spoggly. I am saying that in my opinion this person talking about wanting to show her naked body to her married co-star, on top of all the other talk she's done about how hot her married co-star is, makes her sound like a person who would offer up her naked body to a married co-star. Is there a less loaded word I can use for that concept? I will edit the post if so.

A few jokes on camera are OK. Years of blatantly talking about how much she wants to have a sex scene with Hugh followed by this particular statement crossed the line. She is demeaning herself as a woman and a person, in my opinion.

You seem to think what she said is fine. That's fine. We can disagree.

And yes, "moron" can be a loaded word depending on who uses it and when.

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

How about "it doesn't sound classy" or anything that doesn't rest on concepts of sexual women being sluts or up for prostitution (bonus points if there is degeneration of sex work)? You and other commenters are speaking as if you do know these people, and their reactions, when it's pretty obvious that what she's saying is meant to play off the show's dynamics. People say stuff like Lisa E does all the time - RSL has done it and no one clutched at their pearl necklaces over that. I barely care about whether it's acceptable publicity or not - the gross internalized attitudes are what bother me.

The implications/statements in this post and these comments are misogynistic, and yes, there is a difference between saying someone is acting like a moron/idiot/stupid and someone is acting like a whore/slut/prostitute.

I like you so normally this would be nicer, but I am pretty skeeved out.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

Just to confirm, by misogyny, you mean "hatred of women," right? I don't hate women as a whole. I don't hate Lisa Edelstein. I am scornful of her continued inistence on talking about her sexual attraction to her committed-to-someone-else male co-star and her promotion of the sexual aspects of her character as if they are the only thing worthy of our attention. Maybe that is standard promotion but it feeds into the male-dominated society in which, to quote bammel, "Women are regarded as subhuman, purchasable fuckbags."

I do not think sexual women are sluts. I think this line of talk makes a person SOUND like a slut. It is my opinion of the impression given by her public statements. Period. I have no idea what sex she actually has when or where and I DON'T CARE.

RSL has not "joked" about showing his body to his co-star in any of the nine gazillion interviews I have seen and read about him. Maybe I missed one. He did make that completely perv-o statement about watching the teenaged girls, and I included that IN THIS POST to scorn and shame.

I normally like you too, but not when you make assumptions about my motivations instead of listening to me.

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

I am listening to you, and I'm sorry if it comes across as if I'm not, but everything I'm saying I inferred from things you've said in this post and the comments.

Misogyny is not confined to the direct literal meaning, and nowhere have I accused you of hating anyone. I just said it falls into sexist patterns of behavior to use that terminology in the way you're using it, and if we're going by what bammel's said, it also props up that same patriarchal society.

He has made sexualized comments about HL, idk if you know about that/care about that/etc.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

First, let me apologize for the tone of my comments directly to you. In re-reading, the tone sounds snotty and defensive, and that's certainly not the way to have an open conversation. I apologize for being rude to you.

One thing I haven't shared is that I've been thinking through gender and equality issues for a very long time, about 30 years.

TL;DR: I was never the kind of girl that society said was a typical girl, and yet I wasn't a "tomboy," so what did that make me? What did it mean that my mother worked? Why in the world was there a "Booster" club in my high school that had the sole purpose of girls making treats to honor the boy football and basketball players? Portrayals of women in the media, in popular culture; the elevation of marriage as the only desired state of fulfillment for women. Women "having it all" meaning that they had to work AND do all the things around the house. The glass ceiling, the refusal of Congress to enact the ERA, women as teachers & men as principals, women as nurses & men as doctors.

Androgyny was my first solution -- parity through denial of differences and emphasis of commonality. But somehow androgyny always seemed to mean everyone has to be like men, because of course that's the default. So then the question arises, What does it mean to be a woman? If I want the woman's perspective to be seen as equally as valid as the man's, what do I mean by "the woman's perspective"?

It's extremely important to think though one's opinions, to re-examine one's perspectives again and again. I felt defensive about your comments because I thought you'd made the assumption that I hadn't considered my words, hadn't thought.

I took the word "whore" out of this post for you. I still think its use was appropriate for the particular criticism I leveled, in this particular instance, but I can see your perspective on your feelings about the word.

Which comments RSL has made do you feel are sexualized? The only thing that comes to mind is "homina homina homina," but I'd like to hear more. First, for the purpose of continuing the discussion, and second, for personal private reasons of my own.

[deelaundry.livejournal.com]

PS. Did you know that you and I and most of the people on my f-list are "women who conform to patriarchal ways of thinking ... characterized by lesbophobia, homophobia, woman-hatred and severe phallocentricity." It's true! Because we like slash, according to this person (http://spinningspinsters.wordpress.com/2008/03/03/in-the-tradition-of-the-wickedary-part-two-by-dissenter/).

LOLOLOLOL

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

o you

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

Tell me more about what women's empowerment is about. You have an amazing grasp.

[poorfrances.livejournal.com]

The irony is that is not only completely unnecessary professionally to say stuff like that, but it's denigrating to not only herself but Hugh Laurie. I've never seen HL be remotely sexist, in fact he's always spoken of LE with the greatest respect and praised her as an actor, etc. He's uncomfortable being called a sex symbol himself and has gone on record with being uncomfortable with her stripping scene from "House's Head." So for LE to go on, even jokingly, in interviews like that about how sexy HL is, her getting naked for him, etc. strikes me as odd when it's well established he finds that sort of talk uncomfortable. In fact, sometimes he's sitting right next to her at the time and is visibly uncomfortable. Whether she's joking or not, it seems in poor taste.

And on a general feminist note, it strikes me as very "I just took my first women's studies course in college, let me show you it" to think that us women are all a part of some magical sisterhood where we shouldn't criticize each other (like we're supposed to fall into line because we all have vaginas, how sexist is that?). I'm with you Dee (and, goes without saying, thyroidstorm) in that if a man says something sexist I'll call him on it, and if a woman does it I'll call him on it. I find LE charming and talented and have actually been confused for awhile about why she she seems so eager to play up Cuddy as a sex object in interviews (I thought the interviews which basically talked nothing about her stripping scenes - and the scene itself - fairly yucky) when it's not only unnecessary but detrimental to her job as the character! Cuddy at least USED to be unique on television: a smart, funny female executive character that was in control.

And any person making comments like that about their real-life committed co-star - who is uncomfortable with sexy talk - is whorish, whether they have a vagina or not. If there is anything to do "as feminists," it is to call out other women when they act like that. There's no need for it, in general or in this specific case, and maybe if people (particularly female viewers or fans) let it be known that we'd rather hear the actresses talk about their characters or the show rather than sex scenes or their bodies, they'd get the point. Rather than debating whether anything should be said should at all - women aren't a mass of sheeplike victims and we call out each other if we want to. You can better believe that if a male star said those things about his female coworker, we'd be hearing a huge uproar and a lot worse terms than "whore!"

We're coming off an election where one party had a female nominee for president and the other party also had a woman on the ticket. The Speaker of the House is a woman. We have a female Secretary of State who is being succeeded by another woman into the position. Etc. etc. Female executives are not strange new things, and a woman in a business suit is not looked at as some alien from another planet. Cuddy was a smart and interesting character - and a lot more interesting - when she was House's boss and equal rather than dancing on stripper pole. And Lisa E. is a lot more interesting when she takes herself seriously as an actress, or when she's funny and charming, etc. rather than when she's mock drooling over her co-star or talking about her abs.

[spoggly.livejournal.com]

O lol, you can't grasp the point either. It's cool, don't worry about it. And fwiw, it's not ~*~lol feminism 101~*~ to say that women shouldn't tear other women down by using demeaning language (which =/= criticizing each other).