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

[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