Faludi's Nightmare
Michael C. Moynihan | October 23, 2007, 3:50pm
New York Times reviewer Michiko Kakutani rips into Susan Faludi's
The Terror Dream, a book, she explains, that takes the "momentous subject of 9/11 and come to the conclusion that it led to...an assault on the freedom and independence of American women." Kakutani opens:
This, sadly, is the sort of tendentious, self-important, sloppily reasoned book that gives feminism a bad name.
She pooh-poohs Faludi's premise that 9/11 has led to the "disappearance of female voices" from the public debate:
To begin with, the reader wants to ask: What disappearance of female voices? What "bugle call" to "return to Betty Crocker domesticity?" Since 9/11, Hillary Rodham Clinton has become the leading Democratic contender in the race for the White House, with a good chance of becoming the first female president in history; Katie Couric was named anchor of the CBS Evening News; and women like Lara Logan of CBS and Martha Raddatz of ABC have been reporting from the frontlines of the war in Iraq.
Kakutani twists the knife in the concluding paragraph:
Such errors of logic are typical of this ill-conceived and poorly executed book - a book that stands as one of the more nonsensical volumes yet published about the aftermath of 9/11.
Ouch.
Full review
here.
GILMORE | October 23, 2007, 5:23pm | #
Chuck =
"Half-Right" is an expression only a woman could say unashamedly :) "Half-Right" is still pretty freaking wrong.
Im nagging you of course ("watch the road!")...
Yes, anybody could stand on their particular soapbox and claim that 9/11 was particularly bad for [insert = Gays? Blacks? Libertarians? Arab Americans? The Deficit? Urban Planners? Political Poets?]... and they would maybe have a point, albeit one that consciously ignores that the same is more or less true for *everyone else as well*
It's this kind of 'identity politics' shit that drives me up the wall. I went to a rally at the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq with my girlfriend (who worked/works at the UN)...one of these protest things. I wasnt protesting. I made a sign that said "No duct tape for freedom fries". A lot of people asked me who I was with. I said the UN. I was in a way. I was with my girlfriend. Anyway, all these groups were there protesting the invasion. I was protesting the protestors I guess. They were like, "Lesbian Vegans Against the War" , "Palestinian American Business Owners" "ASPCA Against Bombs In General".... not one of them could be against a policy (in this case, invasion) without first putting "who they think they are" in front of it... as though the two things have something to do with one another.
Some people argue that Who You Are sorta predetermines What You Are Supposed To Think... or if not determines... at least somehow *justifies* your opinion.
Example = One time a girl said she had 'a more detailed understanding of marginalized cultures like "the poor" because she was a rich middle class white lesbian. Being lesbian made her an "outsider", ergo closer to the other "outsiders" in her mind at least. When I pointed out this was sorta... well, tenuous... she was like, TYPICAL! White Male Oppressing My Uniqueness!! His Discourse is Repressing My Relevance!!
Anyway, thats my beef with this crap. I pray for a day when we figure out there are bigger fish to fry and dont sit around stroking our 'unique identities' instead of trying to be as objective as possible about the state of affairs that affects everyone. Maybe a little less egotism, a little more effort to see the world in broader, more inclusive terms.
