ToTheCenter

Navigation

· Home
· Discussion Forum
· News Categories
· Staff Page
· Search
· RSS Feeds
· Ultimate Stat Page
· Links
· Contact
· Voice Your Opinion

News Feeds

Welcome

Women Behaving Badly

Advert

Since the Nineteenth Amendment was passed four score and nine years ago, women in America have been taking increasingly greater strides toward gender equality: excelling at men’s jobs during WWII; gaining equal pay rights in 1963; Title IX in 1972; a four-star general in 2005; and two women who have very serious campaigns for the Presidency possibly coming to fruition in the next couple of election cycles.

But there is one aspect of womanhood that our nation seems to be unable to accept as equal to that of men. For some reason, it is still more scandalous when a woman acts inappropriately in public. People just can’t accept that women are just as capable as men of being jerks.

-----

Three incidents this week have brought the condition to the surface.

First, the revelation that Carrie Prejean, AKA Miss California 2009, pulled out of a lawsuit against the Miss America Pageant because the proceedings might bring a sex-tape to the public sphere. This wouldn’t have been such a big deal, if it hadn’t been for Prejean’s comment during the interview portion of the pageant last year, when, citing her Christian faith, she said marriage should only be between a man and a woman.

The concept that Miss Holier Than Thou had videotaped herself doing – well, I hear it’s a one-star show, if you get my drift – quit thinking about it, Schroe6 – anyway, doing unspeakable acts as a 17-year-old was THE scandal of the week. Why was it such a big deal? Because hypocrisy among men has become the accepted standard, but women haven’t been given that luxury yet.

For example, when news comes out next month that another family-values politician slept with his campaign manager (coin toss on whether it was a guy or girl), we’ll turn the page relatively quickly. In the Hollywood sphere, men are almost always excused more readily for their sexual double-standards.

Mel Gibson, Mr. Uber-Catholic, gets divorced and has a child out of wedlock? Let’s go see Apocalypto! Roman Polanski was so heartbroken by the murder of his pregnant wife that he date-raped a 13-year-old? Let him off, he’s a great director!

But a WOMAN who preached traditional values got a boob job and made a sex tape? Burn her at the stake! Take her crown back! Make her apologize to gay-rights groups! But don’t do it during Letterman . . . he’s making a comeback!

-----

Another woman bearing the brunt of our double-standards this week was Elizabeth Lambert. You might know her better as Crazy Bitch Soccer Player, the one stalking the pitch wearing the New Mexico Lobos jersey in all those YouTube videos, punching and swatting and yanking her foes down by their ponytail.

When football player LeGarrette Blount of Oregon punched a Boise State player after a game earlier this year, it was covered by ESPN and the schmucks on your local sports radio show. Brandon Spikes of Florida gouging out the eyes of a Georgia opponent a couple of weeks ago received similar treatment.

Blount and Spikes weren’t scrutinized by ET, TMZ, The Insider, Access Hollywood, the Today Show, the View, and just about every other pop culture media hub in our country. The necessity of suspending Blount wasn’t discussed by Meredith Vieira. Spikes’s player profile page on the university athletics Web site wasn’t crashed by Googlers.

For males, physical aggression is often an accepted part of competition. Testosterone, adrenaline, steroids . . . whatever the cause, people are rarely offended by the violent indiscretions of our male athletes. Boys will be boys. But for women to exhibit that type of behavior is clearly appalling to Americans, as evidenced by the outrage over Lambert’s actions.

It’s also noteworthy that Blount and Spikes were playing college football, one of the top spectator sports in our country, and committed their crimes on national television. Lambert was playing women’s college soccer, which ranks just above synchronized diving on the media-attention-given scale, and did her dirty deeds live in front of, well, basically only those who purchased the local college sports package from their New Mexico cable supplier. But her headlines far outnumbered those about the guys . . . our prejudice against women can find anybody, anywhere.

-----

Sex and violence aren’t the only arenas denying access to women. Political incorrectness also showed this week why it’s still a boys’ club.

Did anybody else watch “Family Guy Presents: Seth and Alex’s Almost Live Variety Show” on Sunday night? (Sidenote – Did anybody else go the entire half-hour without laughing? Did anybody else feel like they needed to take a shower afterwards, especially after the end bit on foul-smelling female genitalia? Just wondering.)

The media hubbub surrounding the run-up to the Fox special was based mostly on a skit that was seen as offensive toward Jews by some, causing Microsoft to pull its sponsorship.

But the media criticism after the broadcast was centered on a skit in which comedienne Alex Borstein performed Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face” as Marlee Matlin, a deaf actress who talks like a stereotypical deaf person.

Never mind that “Family Guy” creator Seth MacFarlane probably wrote the skit; or that Matlin herself was in on the joke, showing up to insult Borstein about her weight; or that MacFarlane poked fun at Jews and Christians at various points in the show, said the media critics. Borstein – and Matlin – crossed the line and offended the deaf community, and that ruined the show for them.

(Another sidenote – They should have been more worried that the skit was drug out waaaaaaay too long and was humorous only as cheap shots at easy targets, two factors that bring down a lot of “Family Guy” episodes.)

How could anybody pick one skit out of this show to criticize as being the most offensive? That’s like picking out the biggest liar in Congress, or the most worthless player for the Lions, or the cheesiest Horatio Caine line. Was it just a coincidence that the “most offensive” skit was the one performed by two women, one of them an otherwise kind and inspirational public figure?

Isn’t it really the idea that superwoman Matlin would even be part of something so tasteless that offends us? A strong woman, a role model for all women facing adversity . . . that she would stoop to such levels of political incorrectness for some laughs seems almost inexcusable.

But what if a man were in the same spot . . . would it be excused more readily as a simple moment of levity, or a minor career mistake, for an otherwise decent guy?

-----

It’s strange to think that what most would consider a positive prejudice – the idea that women are generally nicer and more decent than men – could be covering up some of the negative thinking that has kept women from leveling the playing field all these years after women’s suffrage.

Americans still want women to fit the roles tradition has assigned them. Nice stands for docile, and decent really means inhibited. Women who act like the boys – Paris Hilton, Martha Stewart, Sarah Silverman – are still going to find that their actions are considered less acceptable than those of their male peers. In the meantime, we still haven’t had a female POTUS or veep and women still number less than 20 percent on the boards of Fortune 500 companies.

I’m no sociologist, but a functional stick to use when measuring how far gender equality has really come in this country might be to assess how willing our society is to accept the evils of women. Perhaps once we understand that women are sexual deviants, violent offenders, and crude boors just as often as men, we can assume that women are equally capable in all other areas as well.

I never thought I’d say this, but I would like to start a new feminist movement. Hear this, America: Women aren’t nice, or decent, or considerate people. They’re just people - selfish, arrogant, regular people. Get over it.

Comments

#1 | showerjuggernaut on November 11 2009 14:55:20

timroy -

i always like to be the first to comment on your stories, but I've only got one thing to say.

you call out family guy for taking "cheap shots at easy targets."

then you make fun of the Lions.

pot, kettle, etc.

#2 | ethwc on November 11 2009 16:13:14

A few thoughts:
Violent behavior in sports should never be condoned nor allowed. It is time that athletes, male or female, who engage in violent conduct be banned from the sport not simply given a minor slap on the hand and sent back to the sport. Specifically, athletes who rape or physically attack other persons should be "fired" by their coaches. Those who lose control and gouge eyes, strike with a fist, or otherwise seek to injure opponents need to be exiled from the sport.
Second, I am confused why you continued to watch a program that appears to have been not only offensive but of poor quality. There are numerous choices on TV not to mention books and other entertainment options. Why watch a comedy show that provides not a single laugh in one half hour?
Third, you are quite correct that women appear to be given less leeway than men for similar conduct. I am not aware of any case of a man going to jail for "misleading" investigators. Fines, yes, jail no. In the end, Ms Stewart's main error was to answer any question. She had broken no laws (she was not an insider for the case involved) and we are not required to answer questions of investigators. However, if we do answer we are obligated to tell the truth (unless you happen to be a President of the US in which case lying is probably OK)
Finally, I agree that it would be nice if all persons were judged by the same standard. Perhaps, that would be the ultimate recognition of equality. On the other hand, there would be a major overpopulation of the jails if young white drug users and delinquents were prosecuted at the same rate as those of color. Maybe, we would have to reconsider the need to incarcerate such individuals.

#3 | timroy on November 11 2009 20:27:09

I appreciated your take on violence in sports. It is easy to understand, though, why taking a young man and convincing him he's superman and roiding him up and telling him to knock the shit out of other guys on the field would lead to violent behavior.

As for watching the bad program, think about it this way: you think those reporters really enjoy watching exocutions? No, but they're dedicated to their craft...they couldn't tell the story if they weren't there. My craft is being an amatuer current events blogger, and I'm willing to make all the sacrifices that come with that.

I didn't know all the details about Martha, appreciate the info. It was amazing how people couldn't accept that should would break a law, period...a women can't get away with being two-faced.

Touche on the race thing. That's a whole different argument, but the laws that just happen to prosecute certain types of crime much more severly than others are a huge fault in our judicial system.

#4 | MplsVala on November 15 2009 04:13:18

Eye-gouging on national tv? Wow. I missed that. And you're right, I've seen the hair pull tape a dozen times so far. (Not by choice.) Inappropriate violence in sports really should be slammed for everyone.

On the other hand, there would be a major overpopulation of the jails if young white drug users and delinquents were prosecuted at the same rate as those of color.

LOL. Actually, there is some pretty serious over-population in the jails now, so we really should be reconsidering those incarcerations.

#5 | GonzaloU on November 23 2009 00:20:47

We are all mumbling about women behaving badly. It is expected to think of women as refined and delicate in their manners. It is the culture that contributed that. Well, we are now in a liberated world an women are beginning to be independent and fighting for equality and their gender rights. It came to us as unusual and inappropriate. I do understand that. But still you could not compare women from other creatures out there that many thinks is harmless enough to make as pet but what they don't know will bring them some tragedy.
People that regularly watch Oprah might have been somewhat perturbed by the Oprah chimp victim, or Charla Nash. Charla Nash is an incredibly brave woman for appearing in public after what she's been through. A savage attack by her friend's pet chimpanzee left her permanently disfigured and blind. She basically lives at a hospital in Cleveland. A chimpanzee, despite what you see on television, doesn't make a good pet. They are up to 5 times stronger than humans, and are very violent. The family of Charla Nash has set up a foundation to cover her medical care, and donating some quick cash would be a very charitable thing to do.