I have to respectfully disagree with that first line. Stupid bitch, ugly cow, and slut all show up in the schoolyard bully’s lexicon towards the end of elementary school. Instead of being colourful, they are absolutely bog-standard, boring, and showing a complete lack of imagination. If anything, they’re a mighty poor reflection on the sort of person ('cos it’s not always men) who use such insults.
We’ll know women politicians are being taken seriously when what’s thrown at them improves in quality and relevance. The only woman politician I can think of who achieved such a status was Thatcher.
Jordan Peterson has come up with a Great Books list…all white men, what a surprise.
I haven’t found a better source, but fuck. Sticky header warning.
https://rewire.news/legislative-tracker/law/utah-vital-statistics-act-amendment-hb-153/
That story ended up in my fucking feed yesterday; I immediately adjusted my settings to ‘restrict all articles from BigThink.’
You know how crime victims are humanized by talking about their work, hobbies, etc?
Police and the victims’ families identified the women as: newlywed Cynthia Watson, mother-of-two Marisol Lopez, mother-of-three Jessica Montague, grandmother Debra Cook and mother-of-seven Ana Piñon-Williams.
For the record, 4 of those 5 women were employees at the bank. Not sure about the 65 year old newlywed…maybe she’s a farmer, or maybe she’s retired? Must have had a life before she became Mrs. whomever. No way to know, because that’s not important.
It’s so weird how women are always seen in relationship to others and not for their accomplishments. Like, 85 year old newlywed has lived for more than 80 years before she married that dude, but now she is his wife so whatever she did in the preceding years apparently not nearly as important as landing that man.
And this is why I hate book titles like The Astronaut’s Wife. Even The Time Traveler’s Wife, a book I really love… I hate the title. The Time Traveler’s Marriage would have reflected the story better.
65, not 85, not that it matters. She still lived 60 years before she met her current husband. So what about her life before that? I assume she was a farmer, because she lives on a farm now, but she has probably led a rich full life besides farming and having met her husband at age 60.
Yep. The story was not really about her, and it’s not even about him so much as it’s about their relationship. The relationship is the part that I’m really having trouble wrapping my head around. They start meeting when he’s an adult man and she’s a small child, but then they meet for real when they are both in their 20s, yet she never catches on. Not to mention the weird time travel paradox of how he basically goes back in time to alter her trajectory in life (and thus, his own).
/hijack
That Guy Who Kept Appearing in Her Life and Then Ghosting Her.
What a pile of transphobic shit.
To be fair, it was because he had a weird medical condition, which his daughter also had, which causes the sufferer to randomly travel backwards and forwards in time. Not sure where the author came up with that one, but it’s an interesting concept.
???
The very first thing she says to him when they meet for the first time on his timeline is his first name. He has no idea who she is. And when they start dating she deliberately wears clothes and makeup she already knows he likes.
The novel is supposed to be based on the author’s series of relationships with men during her life. I haven’t read it, or know much about her to know how closely the movie mirrors her IRL life.
The film… was well cast, but the script made some poor choices. They kept trying to make it a standard love story, when the whole reason it was popular was that it wasn’t a standard love story.
I’d love to see a different version, one with the same introduction as the book (“what’s it like?”). Come to think of it, the Coen brothers would probably do a decent job.
Yeah, I think I got that backwards somehow. Like I said, this timeline can be very confusing.
This. This thread. This is how you should respond when someone points out that “hey, just so you know, that thing you said was sexist/racist/ableist/-phobic.”
It’s hard to accept that we fucked up, that we aren’t as good a person as we think we are, as our self-image shows us to be, but getting defensive doesn’t make us better. Listening, acknowledging, fixing what we can (we can’t fix the past, but we can reduce damage for the future), are the appropriate responses. So, too, is transparency. She’s not just changing it quietly and denying it ever happened. This is how we learn and get better.
With one important caveat: if it’s in the book because a vile person is saying it and they mean to be vile.
Not every word in a book is supposed to represent how the author thinks, or what they approve of.
See: Dire Straits, Money for Nothing