"I’d never questioned my gender before I came to America; growing up in India, I’d always identified as a girl."

"Of course, India has a gender hegemony of its own — one I arguably benefitted from in many ways and suffered from in others. I am upper-caste, upper-class, Hindu, and also a Tamil woman who didn’t look like the models in the Fair & Lovely commercials. I was the only Tamilian in most rooms I was in, a fact my North Indian classmates consistently reminded me of. Still, the popular conception of what a woman or a man was felt more fluid. I grew up among Sikh women who didn’t tame their body hair, men who would hold hands platonically with their male friends, and children who cross-dressed for play (almost every boy had a photo of himself dressed up as a girl by his mother for fun).... [And there] is our third-gender community, or hijras, as they are commonly known...."

Writes Supriya Ganesh,  "My Strange Dysphoria/Growing up in India, I never questioned my gender. When I moved to the U.S. at 18, I began to feel disconnected from my body" (New York Magazine).

"Sure, even I get caught up in the romantic notion that a life exists beyond the grueling 9-to-5 of our capitalist society. A simple life, baking bread and caring for children..."

"... bestows a sense of comfort. But the promise of a tradwife is nothing more than fiction. And the idea of a womanhood that’s 'natural' has been completely determined by a white, male-centric society. Tradwife content allows young women to shrug off any sense of self-blame or responsibility for their role in society.... Tradwives get so caught up in their echo chambers that protecting the nuclear family seems like safeguarding existence itself, and they become completely insulated from what they deem 'unnatural': queerness, diversity, difference of thought. Without this exposure, they are unable to strengthen their sense of empathy.... They become so segregated from the rest of the world that they begin to believe that they will never achieve more—should not achieve more—than the conservative 'natural' role of womanhood.... Starting an article with the headline 'Did Liberal Feminism Ruin the Workplace?' does nothing more than appeal to those who try to keep lower-income women oppressed and drive young people into a tradwife future that keeps them caged."

Said Kenneal Patterson, one of the participants in a Vanity Fair conversation called "Women of Vanity Fair Consider Ross Douthat’s Question: Did Women Ruin the Workplace? Today, The New York Times published a conversation between the conservative columnist and two writers about just how bad ladies have screwed up corporate culture with their presence. We felt we should engage."

"Today" was a few days ago. We talked about the Ross Douthat piece here, 3 days ago (and that post has a gift link to the provocatively titled Douthat conversation).

"I think most men are gay in DC — either out or closeted depending on whether they’re Democrats or Republicans."

"I want to marry someone who allows me to protect feminine energy in a world that is forcing me to be a girl boss because they keep sending Steve to prison. Perhaps I have…"

Said Natalie Winters, quoted by Katy Balls in The London Times, "My night out with Trump’s young Maga crowd in Washington."

"Steve" = Steve Bannon. Winters works as a White House correspondent for Steve Bannon’s "War Room."

"What is the social scene like in Maga term two? '‘I think there is more of a diversity of ways that groups enter this movement, so you get a broader… For instance, Maha — it’s more the trad wife, pro-natalist people who are really into that. It all mixes. It’s a bigger tent,' says Winters. There is also a bunch of tech bros in town, but to the disappointment of some in the Maga coalition and some of the young Republicans looking for husbands, they rarely come out...."

Are women today thinking about themselves in terms of "feminine energy"? A quick search for the term will turn up some very lightweight stuff. I won't link to any of it. I'll just quote the 2 times the phrase has come up on my blog:

2013: "If you are truly a feminine woman at your core, but don’t know how to let your femininity surface, you will end up unhappy, feeling miserable and depleted.... Being able to claim your feminine energy is at the heart of your own happiness, and most definitely the happiness of your relationship." 

That's a quote from Renee Wade.

2025: "And I, I just think we kind of swung culturally to that part of the, the kind of the spectrum where, you know, it's all like, okay, masculinity is toxic. We have to like get rid of it completely. It's, like, no, like it's, both of these things are good, right? It's like you want, like, feminine energy, you want masculine energy. Like I, I think that that's like you're gonna have parts of society that have more of one or the other. I think that that's all good."

And that's a quote from Mark Zuckerberg.

"From the beginning, those voices were highly regulated and controlled so as not to provoke certain outrage..."

"... as if it were a given that a woman virtually freed of her uterus and visual sexual signifiers would obviously pose some considerable threat. Consider the guidelines of a pamphlet for operators published by the Chicago Telephone Company in the early 20th century and called 'First Lessons in Telephone Operating.' The book was used to train some of the first generations of disembodied female voices — belonging to women who were given entree into a new line of work only because the young men who preceded them found the job so annoying that they were, in fact, uncontrollably rude. 'The training of the voice to become soft, low, melodious and to carry well is the most difficult lesson an operator has to learn,' the guide reads.... The voice of novel technological communication has been, almost from the beginning, a female voice, which is to say the voice of a helper, a perfect helper, pleasant, unflappable, immune to insults, come-ons and bossiness. It’s a short path from the telephone operator to Apple’s Siri and Amazon’s Alexa, both forever placating, always even-keeled, impervious...."

Writes Susan Dominus, in "Has the Internet Changed How Women Sound? Technology’s many automated female voices are nothing if not helpful" (NYT).

How Michelle Obama reminded me of Jordan Peterson.

I'd just listened to Jordan Peterson on Joe Rogan's podcast. I blogged about some of it, here, yesterday. Peterson was criticizing woman who fail to develop beyond their natural, instinctive empathy. Let me give you a bit more of what he said:

"I've been lecturing to people for a long time about how to conduct themselves in life so they don't become a tyrant or a handmaiden to the tyrants, a silent handmaiden to the tyrants, let's say.... Because women are more agreeable, they're more prone to manipulation by psychopaths because their primary ethos is nurturing. For a naive woman, every victim is a baby...."

Now, you may find it odd, but I hear echoes of that as I am listening to Michelle Obama in "You Need to Learn to Say No (Even to an Inauguration)," the new episode of her podcast.

I know, your first inclination may be to mock the "poor me" aspect of this. She doesn't have a thing to wear... to the Inauguration. And not having a thing to wear, for her, means instructing her team of clothing wranglers to avoid readying the appropriate outfit, which they otherwise actively assemble for every possible occasion that might pop up (or "pop off"). She is not like other women. Very funny. But true! So work past that instinct to mock. I want you to think about how she is confessing to the agreeableness vulnerability that Jordan Peterson sees in women.

Michelle says:

"A new straight-studies course treats male-female partnerships as the real deviance."

Subheadline for a New York Magazine article titled, "If Hetero Relationships Are So Bad, Why Do Women Go Back for More?" The teaser title on the front page is "Do Straight Women Really Exist?" The author of the article is Jessica Bennett.

“In this class, we’re going to flip the script,” [said sociologist Jane Ward to her students on the first day of class]. “It’s going to be a place where we worry about straight people. Where we feel sympathy for straight people. We are going to be allies to straight people.”...

Flipping the script is a good approach to studying the topic, and the topic is worthy of study. However, I don't like being directed to "worry" or "feel sympathy" or "be allies." I'd look at the subject head on. But neutrality is cruel, and women want to present as empathetic. 

The online world seems to get weirder and more retrograde about heterosexuality every day. Idealized masculinity has become more aggressive, more jacked up, and also more high maintenance... while femininity gets ever “softer,” more nurturing and domestic, and somehow still more sexy....

"Just a heads-up."

Liberal woman informs everyone that she won't be dating white men anymore.

Groundbreaking information.pic.twitter.com/2lC5Kqm0Qb

— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) March 29, 2025

Ridiculous on so many levels, but I'm just going to highlight the exaggerated enunciation — "as a WHiTTTTe woman."

It made me think of this TikTok video criticizing Rachel Zegler ("Snow White") for over-enunciating:

"If... your dress is for internal satisfaction — if it is an expression of your own sense of gender and what it means to you..."

"... simply wearing what makes you feel most like yourself and reminds you of your own belief system is the answer. If the point you want to make is about old gender norms, simply failing to buy into them, literally, may be enough. Maybe that means wearing chunky boots with a big tread rather than stilettos. Maybe it means a concert tee underneath a suit jacket.... If you want it to go further... there is a simple way to turn a fashion choice into a form of protest. Create a uniform for yourself that stands out simply because it is different from the uniform of the majority.... Wear any garment consistently, and at some point everyone else should get the message... "

The NYT style writer Vanessa Friedman writes in "What Should I Wear to Protest an Unspoken Dress Code? A reader asks how to push back against the resurgence of traditional dressing. Our critic discusses the history of rebellion through clothing and how to make a true 'fashion statement.'"

Speaking of a concert tee underneath a suit jacket and creating a uniform for yourself, I'm remembering that NYT article that's been getting a lot of attention —"Inside Musk’s Aggressive Incursion Into the Federal Government" (blogged here by me yesterday). It says:

Some of the young workers on Mr. Musk’s team share a similar uniform: blazers worn over T-shirts. At the G.S.A., some staff members began calling the team “the Bobs,” a reference to management consultant characters from the dark comedy movie “Office Space” who are responsible for layoffs.

I have a feeling Musk's guys look much cooler than the Bobs in "Office Space"... 

... and I bet they cause more anxiety.

What would you say you do here?

A funny answer would be: I protest gender norms.

"There’s this tyranny of beauty, especially among trans women.There’s this feeling that, if we’re not beautiful enough, we’re not really women."

Writes Jennifer Finney Boylan, quoted in "A 'Weary but Fabulous' Poster Girl for Trans Life Opens Up About Aging/In her fifth memoir, 'Cleavage,' Jennifer Finney Boylan writes about her 36-year marriage, her adult children and why she keeps telling her story" (NYT).

Early in her new memoir, “Cleavage,” Jennifer Finney Boylan describes a moment of reckoning in a changing room. A size 12 dress is too snug....

The problem wasn’t that she’d gained almost 50 pounds in 25 years. “The crisis was that it mattered to me now, as a woman,” Boylan, 66, writes. “When I was a man (sic), I can say most definitively that it had not.”

Is that "(sic)" in the memoir or is the NYT inserting it? I'm going to guess, because of the use of parentheses instead of brackets, that it's in the memoir.

Did not looking good enough matter to Boylan because she was a woman — and that's female psychology — or because she was transgender — and had taken on the task of influencing others to perceive her as a woman? Is it about expressing what's inside you or getting the response you want from other people?

"There’s a raw, instinctive quality to Goebel’s routines: The dancers look as if they aren’t just dancing but are following an elemental urge."

"Over the last decade, pop stars have sought out this off-kilter vision of how female bodies can move. As a result, Goebel is reshaping what pop choreography looks like — and exploding our ideas of what makes a femme body desirable.... It’s not as if this overt display of sexuality has vanished from contemporary pop choreography.... But Goebel’s routines push past titillation into startling, even disturbing territory.... In a routine she choreographed for Nike during Paris couture week, the dancers rolled and thrust their chests forward in a unsettling, Frankenstein-ish lurch, before leaping from the stage and strutting forward, arms crossed, like something Gene Kelly might do in 'Singin’ in the Rain.'"

Writes Coralie Kraft, in "Parris Goebel Is Changing the Way Women Move" (NYT)(free-access link, so you can see the many video clips of what that prose describes). Goebel was the choreographer for Rihanna at the 2023 Super Bowl — "sexy — hands stroking, chests heaving — but strange."

If that made you think of "Puttin' on the Ritz," here's the relevant "Young Frankenstein" clip. If it made you think of "Thriller," go here. If you got hung up on "femme," in the phrase "femme body" — why not "woman's body"? — so did I. But — short of a "femme bodysuit," on sale at Amazon — I didn't find anything I wanted to link, but I did encounter some godawful academic writing that made me feel sorry for the kids going to college these days.

"Cary Grant was an idol of mine and I was in awe watching him in the movies and I wanted to copy him. I love thick suits with structure. I think masculine is feminine."

Said Diane Keaton, quoted in "How Diane Keaton redefined the movie star look/The 78-year-old actress has gathered a voluminous selection of her most celebrated, most treasured and most questionable looks in a new book, 'Fashion First'" (WaPo)(free-access link, so you can see the photos and because it's the last day of the month and I've got 2 more to use).

"It was incredibly different and it was incredibly painful and hurtful, this division of Americans that he has embraced of normal people and everyone else."

"I am a normal person. Queer people are normal Americans. I, I mean, I don't, whatever, I don't, I don't divide the world between normal and abnormal people. I don't think that helps anyone. And in a lot of ways, I think I lead a much more average life than he does. I am not a millionaire. I lead a private existence. And, and specifically the term 'normal' really scared me because he has set up a war between 'normal' people and those who are trying to attack them. You know, I, I'd shared some pretty personal stuff with him about my experience as a trans kid, because I know what it's like to sit and cry as a kid and think I have to fix myself. There's no way that I can be this person and be loved and have a job and be accepted and be okay. And that is a devastating experience. And I was so hopeful that it would be easier for future generations...."

Says Sophia Nelson, in the new episode of the NYT "Daily" podcast, "She Used to Be Friends With JD Vance."

She's speaking to the podcast host, Michael Barbaro, who had just said, based on Nelson's text exchange with Vance, "You say to him... 'The political voice you have become, seems so, so far from the man I got to know in law school,' and JD Vance replies to you, 'I will always love you, but I really do think the left's cultural progressivism is making it harder for normal people to live their lives.'"

Here's the background article, by Stephanie Saul: "JD Vance, an Unlikely Friendship and Why It Ended/His political views differed from a transgender classmate’s, but they forged a bond that lasted a decade — until Mr. Vance seemed to pivot, politically and personally" (NYT)(free access link).

I avoided that article because it seemed like a politically motivated betrayal of a private, personal relationship. I almost avoided the podcast.

"If someone on this committee then starts talking about somebody’s bleach blond, bad-built butch body, that would not be engaging in personalities, correct?"

Said Representative Jasmine Crockett, during a meeting of the House Oversight Committee, referring to Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who had just said to her "I think your fake eyelashes are messing up what you’re reading."

I've seen the video, and now I'm reading the NYT article, "The Ugly Effect of Physical Insults/A recent congressional meeting devolved into a back-and-forth that reflects a changing norm in politics — one that rarely makes anybody look good."

I don't approve of the unprofessionalism, but if we're just comparing insults and taking into account that Crockett didn't start it, I want to say "bleach blond, bad-built butch body" is impressive — with 6 B's in a row and the unforgettable "butch body." And can we analyze the extent to which "bad-built butch body" violates the norms of progressive speech. It's not just body shaming, it's expressing contempt for a woman's failure to have a body in the stereotypical female form. That's transphobic (in the broad sense).

"Bimbo feminism is the celebration of woman as a dumb, hot object. Woman as an absolute idiot."

"To hell with girlbosses and equality in the boardroom. New feminism—bimboism—is about celebrating the vacant, sexual woman, the dumb woman, the hole. Being smart is capitalism. 'No more Instagrams about rising and grinding,' an opinion writer at The New York Times told us one day in describing the trend. 'No more The Wing. No more straining to be smarter than the boys. Bimboism offers an opposing and, to some, refreshing premise: Value me, look at me, not because I’m smart and diligent but for the fact that I’m not. It’s anticapitalist, even antiwork.'...The first wave [of feminism] was the suffragettes from the late 1800s who fought for a woman’s right to be seen as an autonomous individual and to vote. By the 1960s and ’70s, the second wave was about equal rights for women at work and the little things, like being able to own credit cards and decide when you have your own children. The 1990s saw a third wave focused on sexual liberation and expanding the conversation beyond wealthy white women.... And now, in the 2020s, there’s the fourth wave. The fourth turning. The trans revolution and the bimbo feminist.""

Writes Nellie Bowles, in "Morning After the Revolution: Dispatches From the Wrong Side of History" (commission earned).

That opinion writer at The New York Times was Sophie Haigney. Here's her piece "Meet the Self-Described ‘Bimbos’ of TikTok." And here's where I blogged it back in 2022. When I ran across "bimbo feminism" listening to Bowles book this morning, I felt like that's something new, I ought to blog that. But now I see, not only did I blog the article Bowles was talking about, I had the same feeling I was seeing it for the first time:

"She acknowledges being the beneficiary of a previous generation’s progressivism... It’s the crazy activism she’s against — you know, the 'fringe' stuff."

"By fringe, she means trans. She’s peeved that some trans women are trying to redefine feminism in ways that seem to her to be anti-woman, resents that lesbians risk being erased by trendy all-purpose queerness and fears that as a married lesbian mother she will have her own rights swept away by anti-trans backlash.... I was, of course, eager to read good gossip about The Times. The best nugget: After Bowles started dating... Bari Weiss... she says an editor [exclaimed]... 'She’s a Nazi.'... Her most serious charge is that the editor thought her story ideas weren’t as good after that. The obvious question is whether her heterodox turn has conferred much benefit when it comes to ideas. The ones on display here seem pretty shopworn. I recall admiring a sharp-elbowed profile of the psychologist and anti-identity politics commentator Jordan Peterson that Bowles wrote early in her Times tenure. Nothing in this book hits that level.... [T]he book’s central fallacy is that idiocy on the left requires moving to the right. It doesn’t...."

Writes Laura Kipnis, in The New York Times. She's reviewing the new book by Nellie Bowles, "Morning After the Revolution: Dispatches From the Wrong Side of History" (commission earned).

Should I read this book? It's 7 hours by audiobook. I'll try. Kipnis warns me that Bowles is trying to be the new Tom Wolfe, but she's not as good as Wolfe (and neither is Kipnis): "where Wolfe was a precision-guided stiletto, Bowles is more of a dull blade, ridiculing her former colleagues by saddling them with laughably vacuous thoughts and dreams — their 'beautiful vision of the role of journalism for such a beautiful time,' for instance."

What about in that "sharp-elbowed profile" of Peterson? Was she closer to Wolfe back then? I blogged it at the time — here, in 2018. Bowles wrote:

"And is it wrong to say that I may not belong to one sect or the other but am, instead, whatever the nail equivalent of bi(coastal) is?"

"I love each expression precisely because of how different it can make me feel, taking me from a beacon of old-school femininity (with a twist) to something more practical but equally delicate. If the short nail is Audrey Hepburn, the long one is Sophia Loren. In modern terms, let’s say my Natalie Portman sun is facing off against my powerful Cardi B rising. And don’t we all contain multitudes?"

Writes Lena Dunham in Vogue in "The Long and the Short of It: Lena Dunham on Her Nail Journey."

Found because I was wondering what Lena Dunham was doing these days.

"To better accommodate diverse gender identities, some Spanish and Portuguese speakers are increasingly using the -e suffix for some nouns..."

"... such as using 'todes' in addition to 'todos,' both of which mean 'everyone.' Even some government offices in Latin America have adopted using the -e suffix as part of a wider movement for inclusive language. Using Latine (sounds like 'la-TEEN-eh') in the U.S. 'makes sense as an internationally used way of speaking and writing in a less gendered manner,' says Monica Trasandes, director for Spanish language media and representation at GLAAD.... More than half of those polled from states along the U.S.-Mexico border or in the Midwest said the term Latine makes them uncomfortable, and more than 60% of respondents aged 65 and older said the same. There's also pushback in Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries, with people arguing the term is unnecessary or that it distorts grammar rules...."

From "Latine is the new Latinx" (Axios).

It's hard to imagine how this feels to someone whose native language envisions every noun as either masculine or feminine. I've spent time learning French and Spanish, and I have my feelings about the masculinity and femininity that permeates everything, but these are an outsider's feelings, weighed down by effort it takes to learn a lot of extra and seemingly arbitrary information. If it's your native language, you know what's masculine and what's feminine. Isn't it natural and fluent to you? Isn't it disturbing to be pressured to speak differently and to use made-up words in service to someone else's ideology? Do you feel a sense of loss when the world is not enlivened by the masculinity and femininity of inanimate objects and abstract concepts? I don't come from that world, but from a distance, it feels beautiful, and if I were you, I would want to believe it is beautiful.

"Despite recent improvements in image quality, AI-generated images frequently presented a simplistic, whitewashed version of queer life."

"I used Midjourney, another AI tool, to create portraits of LGBTQ people, and the results amplified commonly held stereotypes. Lesbian women are shown with nose rings and stern expressions. Gay men are all fashionable dressers with killer abs. Basic images of trans women are hypersexualized, with lingerie outfits and cleavage-focused camera angles."

From "Here's How Generative AI Depicts Queer People/WIRED investigates how artificial intelligence tools, like OpenAI’s Sora, currently portray members of the LGBTQ community. Hint: It’s a lot of purple hair" (Wired).

So... you ask for a stereotype and you get a stereotype.

You could try to be specific, such as asking for a trans person in a particular job, but... "When asked to generate photos of a trans man as an elected representative, Midjourney created images of someone with a masculine jawline who looked like a professional politician, wearing a suit and posing in a wooden office, but who’s [sic] styling more closely aligned with how a feminine trans woman might express herself: a pink suit, pink lipstick, and long, frizzy hair":

That seems pretty good, except for the egregious mistake: The machine, like many human beings, thought "trans man" meant "trans woman." By the way, I'm interested in the phrase "feminine trans woman." The writer wants A.I. to know that a trans woman does not have to lean into femininity. 

"What explains the disjunction between the remote figure in the photos and the loving grandmother who once harvested onions?"

"Was it just the Trump family attempt at privacy? Or was it too hard for the media to make sense of a grandmother who seemed to prefer Manolos to fuzzy slippers?... Now, with her passing, we are learning more about Mrs. Knavs, and can connect the dots from her hardscrabble beginnings in a former Soviet bloc country to her recent life in Palm Beach. Acknowledging Mrs. Knavs’s origins during her lifetime might have gone a long way toward softening Mrs. Trump’s image during her time as first lady. Instead, Mrs. Knavs was presented to us as a near clone of her daughter, a retinal after-image of Mrs. Trump’s own inscrutable glamour."

So ends "The Inscrutable Glamour of Melania Trump’s Mother In public, Amalija Knavs did not adhere to the stereotypes of an American grandmother" by Rhonda Garelick, in The New York Times.

I was surprised to see this very positive-looking presentation on the front page:

Is the article positive? We're told in the end that Amalija Knavs could have been exploited to greater political effect, and we don't even know exactly why she wasn't. There was all this great material that could have been deployed to soften Melania Trump. Maybe when Melania dies, the NYT will discover material that could have been used to soften her.

The unexamined premise is that women are supposed to be soft. And that human beings are supposed to be used.

"Swift is as inescapable as Captain America once was...."

From a Washington Post headline I didn't click on. It promised: "Here’s how to understand the phenomenon."

I'm just going to guess that what explains the purported inescapability is that mainstream media puts it on their front page every damned day. If I click, it should say, ha ha, your click is the reason. I resist this recursive madness.

And yet, I think Captain America was, recently, a woman, so perhaps the answer is: We always need a beautiful woman upon whom to project our hopes and dreams.

ADDED: It's a kind of serial monogamy. Not long ago, it was Barbie every day. They're not doing Barbie anymore. It's Taylor Swift every day.