She's apologizing after getting criticized for writing (in a NYT op-ed):
I have... experienced the upside of not being a "perfect ten." As a proud feminist with little desire to diet, get plastic surgery or hire a personal trainer, I have almost no personal experience with men asking me to meetings in their hotel rooms. Those of us in Hollywood who don’t represent an impossible standard of beauty have the “luxury” of being overlooked and, in many cases, ignored by men in power unless we can make them money.She overplayed the comic idea of ugly privilege. Reverse lookism is dicier than you might think.
पोस्ट्स
५० टिप्पण्या:
Why is everybody fucking apologizing for what they think.
The mob silences everybody. That might be a clue about something not apparent.
Her point was "You think you have problems, look at me."
As long as you were not being a deliberate asshole you have no obligation to apologize for your words. Others' offense is their problem. Be who you are and say what you want.
Another person's independent thoughts trashed on the altar of political correctness.
You must not deviate from the party line AND you must stay up-to-date on how it changes with the wind or face the wrath of the religious police.
Better to be born a hermaphroditic worm. Nothing to admire, nobody to attract, and dirt is yummy.
Pretty soon every actress, model, or any woman MUST admit to being sexually harrassed/assaulted and MUST name the individual. The liberal elite just can't believe it didn't happen. The Salem witch trials will be tame by comparison.
Goodbye 20%. Hello 100%
She's basically right -- nobody is trying to sexual harass ugly girls. Just ask them out, they'd be grateful (although that does sound a bit mean, apologies).
The other unspoken female dynamic besides "unwanted attention" is the opposite -- when they get pissed at you for NOT hitting on them or NOT asking them out or NOT giving them the attention they want.
Don't forget the "scorned woman" problem, too.
Lotta mines in the sexual minefield.
Here's a good rule: It's not a good idea to insult victims, or shame victims in order to make a point. Just don't.
"She overplayed the comic idea of ugly privilege." By whose standards?
"Reverse lookism is dicier than you might think." Correct. Progs have to anticipate prog wrath.
When popular culture turns into Global Thermonuclear War, the only way to win is to not play.
Beauty is an asset, and so is talent, and so is having a family connections.
If you are beautiful -- but you have merely adequate talent and no family connections -- you still have a chance in Hollywood. You sleep with the Harvey Weinsteins of the industry and in exchange you extract from them opportunities to do paying work.
By saying she is not beautiful, and therefore was never harassed, Bialik is basically saying that she became successful in the entertainment industry in spite of her looks because she's dadgum talented. (As far as I know, she has no family connections.)
I don't see where this ends. Even if we get to a completely segregated society, subdivided by sex, race, ethnicity, oh and, political beliefs, they'll just declare formal war with real weapons to eradicate the un-believers.
Hmmm -
Perhaps a society can be organized for the purpose of persecuting mobs.
Fire with fire.
"Are you now, or have you ever been, affiliated with an internet mob?"
Hollywood really warps one's mind..........
rhhardin said...
Her point was "You think you have problems, look at me."
10/17/17, 2:47 PM
Would it be rude to take a pass (on looking)? Or is my gaze now subject to the victim hierarchy and if the professed victim was to demand my gaze, must I comply? Or may I too #Resist?
I believe that this is also a form of the "humbrag". She is saying that she is/was not pretty enough to sleep her way to fame. She had to get there on actual talent. Not like all of those "pretty" girls who had "options".
For all that, I thought that she was going to say something about dressing modestly (I believe that she does so as part of her religion), but that seemed more to be taking her observation and reading it as an argument. Some feel like there's no point in saying anything unless it's to Make A Point.
I've observed on occasion that, though I've never had much trouble in the dating department, it seems that that particular type of man (the harasser/catcaller/groper) is not particularly interested in me. I don't really dress modestly (or I didn't when I was younger), and I suspect its because I'm flat-chested. But that's hardly an argument that women shouldn't have boobs; just an observation that those particular types of men appear to be more interested in them for some reason, which I find interesting.
who don’t represent an impossible standard of beauty have the “luxury” of being overlooked
She is referring to beauty privilege. That is a form of class diversity where women and men are judged by color and form, and generally visual appeal.
unless we can make them money
Another form of class diversity where women and men are judged by the realized value of their mental and physical labor.
Then, for the truly unfortunate people, there is a form of class diversity that passes judgment based on the profits derived from cannibalization of your "clump of cells".
Zuleika was not strictly beautiful. Her eyes were a trifle large, and their lashes longer than they need have been. An anarchy of small curls were her chevelure, a dark upland of misrule, every hair asserting its rights over a not discreditable brow. For the rest, her features were not at all original. They seemed to have been derived rather from a gallimaufry of familiar models. From Madame la Marquise de Saint-Ouen came the shapely tilt of the nose. The mouth was a mere replica of Cupid's bow, lacquered scarlet and strung with the littlest pearls. No apple tree, no wall of peaches, had not been robbed, nor any Tyrian rose-garden, for the glory of Miss Dobson's cheeks. Her neck was imitation-marble. Her hands and feet were of very mean proportions. She had no waist to speak of.
Zuleika Dobson, Max Beerbohm
So "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful" is out, now?
Anecdote: In grad school, we had a periodic mandatory seminar on what are now called "social justice" issues. There was one focused on how you'd adjust your teaching style to particular races, and so forth. Anyway, this one was on sexism, and we were asked whether we'd ever experienced it in class. I said, flatly, "no," apart from a visiting Japanese math prof in my first semester who always looked to us three girls in the back of the room (in a thirty-something class) whenever he made a difficult point. Certainly I'd not seen any in grad school.
The moderator asked me what my undergrad was in; I told her "mechanical engineering." She said, "Ah, well, often people in technical fields have this perception of equal treatment," as though she knew my own experiences a lot better than I did.
But worse was being confronted by another grad student afterwards. "Well, of course they don't discriminate against you," she said. "They don't see you as female." As she was a coiffed, lipsticky, immaculately-dressed, um, piece of work herself, I could take her point while still deeply resenting it. What I ought to have said at the time was "Yeah, I'm a schlub, but any moron can see that I'm a female schlub. Can't you?"
Another: A short course with rotating graduations. Two very fetching young things, decades younger than I, graduated a couple of days before me, and were praised by more than one faculty member as "beautiful inside and out." I eventually said -- after they were gone -- that no one was going to go out of their way to call me "beautiful," and I wasn't happy with the rub-her-nose-in-it style of teaching.
Fwiw, I think Bialik looks just fine. It's frankly amazing to me that anyone thinks otherwise.
I read her op-ed on Sunday and enjoyed it. Of course someone had to get offended.
"little desire to diet"
Is that the new code word for obese?
As I read her piece, it crossed my mind that rhhardin had ghost-written it for her. But she makes the very point often made here, in one way or another, that the only reason any of this happens is because men often act stupidly as a consequence of the only natural impulse that makes us pure stupid.
As leftmypant said elsewhere, it would be a far better world if men and women acted, respectively, like gentlemen and ladies. But that is so quaint, I hesitate to repeat it.
- Krumhorn
Fwiw, I think Bialik looks just fine. It's frankly amazing to me that anyone thinks otherwise.
She does look fine. Her physiognomy is not the classic baby-doll face, perhaps, but she's slim and graceful and has a nice smile and so forth. Brains, which is attractive.
Some gifts come wrapped.
rcocean said...
"little desire to diet"
Is that the new code word for obese?
I dunno, but she ain't.
Lesson: shut up.
Bialik is also a modern orthodox Jew who adheres to a pretty strict standard of modest dress. If you will notice, for example, neither her nor her character on The Big Bang Theory ever reveals her shoulders. Her observances are often accurate, but she is shouted down because her views on modestly are bizarrely associated with the religious right. Back in the day, radical feminists were not afraid to make alliances of convenience with fundamentalist groups over issues like anti-pornography. That has largely been drummed out of the women's movement, it appears. As Camille Paglia is fond of saying, her side "won." It seems that a lot of women are now paying the consequences for that victory. Be careful what you wish for.
Mechanical engineering... "Well, of course they don't discriminate against you," she said. "They don't see you as female."
Because engineers, and especially mechanical engineers, cannot discern the intricate plot of Nature, and miss the finer points of visual cues.
She's not over-weight, but she doesn't look particularly toned or fit either.
Krumhorn said...As leftmypant said elsewhere, it would be a far better world if men and women acted, respectively, like gentlemen and ladies. But that is so quaint, I hesitate to repeat it.
I know! It's almost as if traditional politeness and manners could have served a useful social purpose, but that's crazy talk!
"They don't see you as female."
Bull. When I was in EE (70s - 90s) we all noticed every female. They stood out as rarities, and were usually much more intellectually interesting than their peers from other schools.
Her response seems sane and good humored. She didn't lose any points with me. She seems like a person worth knowing......It's kind of Stalinist the way they are asking everybody to exquisitely adjust their degree of outrage to Harvey. This much but no less.........Going back to Plautus the dirty old man has been a comic figure. Harvey is dirtier than the average dirty old man and, for that reason, a good deal more comical......Harvey did some real damage to people, but, imho, he is far more a comical figure than a sinister threat to civilization.
"Because engineers, and especially mechanical engineers, cannot discern the intricate plot of Nature, and miss the finer points of visual cues."
Naturally. Mechanical engineers are the most engineer of engineers, or in competition with this with civil engineers. The diff is that mechanical engineers come straight out of the 19th century ironworks, the dark satanic mills. And ultimately from blacksmiths. Civil works were the declasse part of architecture, but were, to a degree, a sort of person it was acceptable for aristocrats to speak with as they had to deal with their works in an agricultural and logistical necessities. Civil engineers were cleaner.
Its really a class thing.
Fred Drinkwater,
But at the time I was a graduate student in musicology, my MechE days long gone. Our department was roughly 50/50 gender-wise, and also 50/50 gay/straight-wise. I'm talking students and professors both. (For the gay/straight, I mean; most of the profs were still men, although the students were about equally split.)
I'll grant that I was noticeable as a woman in MechE. It was kind of fun, actually.
holdfast said...
She's not over-weight, but she doesn't look particularly toned or fit either.
10/17/17, 4:49 PM
1) she is at this point, what, a mother of three?
2) whatever her state of fitness, you'll never know, because she has modesty, and does not display her flesh like the butcher's counter to be admired and sold.
3) whatever she is, she's good with it.
Now we know what they meant by "A very special episode of Blossom."
Please don't use the poor lady's name. I deleted:
"X didn't realize what an eyeful she'd get..."
That's why most women close their eyes before the Money Shot.
I am Laslo.
***
tcrosse said...
"X didn't realize what an eyeful she'd get..."
She's supposed to Celebrate Diversity.
I have... little desire to diet, get plastic surgery or hire a personal trainer ... blah blah...experienced the upside of not being a ...in many cases, ignored by men in power unless we can make them money.
Hey, me too, proud feminist, just like a few billion other people.
"If you wanna be happy" by Jimmy Soul (1963)
If you wanna be happy
For the rest of your life
Never make a pretty woman your wife
So from my personal point of view
Get an ugly girl to marry you
A pretty woman makes her husband look small
And very often causes his downfall
As soon as he marries her, then she starts
To do the things that will break his heart
But if you make an ugly woman your wife
You'll be happy for the rest of your life
An ugly woman cooks her meals on time
She'll always give you peace of mind
"I have almost no experience of men asking me to meetings in hotel rooms."
Intriguing use of almost. A story not told.
Inappropriate, out of control humble bragging. She is pro-choice, by the way, so I am going to say not as religious as most people think she is. It was a well written piece, though ... but every once in a while rich people mistake the fact that they are surrounded by people who think they are great for the non-fact that everyone in the world thinks they are great.
By saying she is not beautiful, and therefore was never harassed, Bialik is basically saying that she became successful in the entertainment industry in spite of her looks because she's dadgum talented.
Except I've seen some of her work and it isn't anything I'm in awe of. There's always going to be spots on shows for non-glamorous character actors who fill the need for "less pretty neighbor" or "screechy grocery clerk," not to mention the biopics of regular-looking famous people.
I thought we women were all supposed to be sharing our experiences now. Why not hers? It's as though there's a narrative expectation, but that couldn't be because who would undermine the whole issue for something trivial and political like that?
Keep eating your own, leftists.
I thought we women were all supposed to be sharing our experiences now.
Only the women who have not been, or will be, classified as deplorable, which it seems clear is a progressive target. A liberal interpretation and selective possession of principles has sustainable consequences, and is a symptom of a coverup of overlapping and convergent interests with ulterior motives.
she became successful in the entertainment industry in spite of her looks because she's dadgum talented
Ideally, talented and selected in order of arrival. I suppose we should err on the side of merit and dignity; but, unfortunately, the prospect of diversity discrimination is a dark cloud that hangs over everyone subject to the progressive policy.
This Weinstein episode is really blowing the lid off of feminism and exposing all of the internal contradictions. There was always the question of whether or not it was empowering for women to present themselves as sex objects. The movement ended up siding with "yes" for the most part, but as in the case of abortion they pretend to be "pro choice" on this question too. Funny though, that women who want to speak out on the "no, this isn't healthy or good" side have to be silenced.
Mayim Bialik reminds me of a seed of an idea which was forming in response to the 57 things article. I think there is a dynamic in which unattractive women (I would not put Ms. Mayim Bialik in this category btw) play a role in which actresses and similarly pulchritudinous women feel besieged by creeps. The attractive women feel like all men are creeps because they are hit-upon constantly. That is not the reality: A small fraction of men are creeps AND a possibly even smaller fraction of women are attractive enough to be noticed by the creeps.
Our new office space has modern, low walled work spaces and the room I am in has about 200 workers. About half are women and my non-scientific estimate is that 5 women in the room are really attractive.
Let's pretend that women don't gussy themselves up to attract men, and certainly not to attract wealthy, powerful men who are in a position to advance their careers. Come on, it'll be fun!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा