Well, that's what it felt like, anyway.
Some of you may have read an article by Charlotte Allen in today's Washington Post. To call it an embarrassment would be tantamount to agreeing that the writer ever had anything to embarrass. Talent? Reason? A snarky sense of humor? If you found anything like that in her article, well, show me, because I didn't find it.
What I read was a piece on how Charlotte finds women stupid because they're "falling for Obama." Women fainted at five separate Obama rallies since last year; a woman declared that she felt "more hopeful" when he spoke; other women scream and cheer when they see him. She also takes a hit at Patty Solis, Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager, and uses the rest of her article to whine that women are dopey little twits who watch worthless soap operas and read pathetic romance novels.
I don't write many letters to the editor. I need to be infuriated to write, and I can't resist the temptation to tell the editor in question that s/he is a moron with an unobstructed view of their alimentary canal. I'm not that genteel in saying so, either. No, I usually excel at signing petitions and using the form letters generated by them. Actually, it's safer. My mother comes from a long line of Appalachian coal miners, and my father was Sicilian. My heritage of profanity is rich, and prone to take over my brain and tongue when I really need not to use it.
But I digress.
I saw this on Andrew Sullivan's blog. (Yes, I know. Sully's a great one for dangling raw meat, and he's often an ass. But he also leaves great articles lying around, and I need reading material.) He noted that Feministing had already picked up this article, so I headed over to see what was up.
Feministing has Charlotte Allen up on the BBQ.
I clicked on the link to Allen's article, read it, and went from, "What a bitch!" to, "Oh, dear God, one-celled organisms could outscore her on an I.Q. test." She happily recounts the vapidity and idiocy of women around her; I submit that, if those are all the women she knows, the problem may not only be theirs. Water usually finds its own level.
Jessica at Feministing provided a link by which readers could tell the Washington Post where to shove their latest "feminist" writer. I clicked on it and wrote the following:
I read the article submitted by Charlotte Allen for the Washington Post, i.e., "Women Aren't Very Bright" (March 2, 2008). Aside from the ridiculous assumptions she makes about women who support Senator Barack Obama's Presidential candidacy, she spouts misogynistic claptrap that, frankly, should have died out with Archie Bunker.
But then again, what am I supposed to think about anyone who writes the following:
I am perfectly willing to admit that I myself am a classic case of female mental deficiencies. I can't add 2 and 2 (well, I can, but then what?). I don't even know how many pairs of shoes I own.
She may be mentally deficient, but she shouldn't blame her sex. Too many women have careers in physics, technology, and engineering to lay her inability to reason at the feet of her chromosomal makeup. I know perfectly well how many pairs of shoes I own (seven); I work in the trust industry; and I support Barack Obama. Without screaming or fainting, I may add.
So much for appealing to women, Post. What's your next tactic--fashion tips for the ladies from Mullah Omar? Good grief.
Sincerely.
I clicked on "Send" and sat back, immensely pleased with myself. I then returned to Feministing, wanting to gloat about how I'd delivered an individual smack to Charlotte Allen's empty brown-nosed head. And as I did, I noted something in the comments.
Namely, the title of the article.
It's, "We Scream, We Swoon. How Dumb Can We Get?"
I called it, "Women Aren't Very Bright."
. . . yeah. Just proving my point, I'm sure. ::sigh:: Move along, nothing to see here--and could someone bring me a bandage and gauze? I think I shot quite a bit off that time.