rebuttal to Susannah Breslin
"The Daily Beast" continued its tradition of questionable journalism today, by publishing a "debate" between two alleged "sexperts," Grant Stoddard (author of the non-fiction book Working Stiff) and Susannah Breslin (author of the blog Reverse Cowgirl). The subject of this so-called debate, which really turns out to not be a debate at all, but rather two opposing but thoroughly undynamic views on a recent study published in the Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, is the question of who "has it worse" when dealing with sexual double standards, men or women. The study allegedly reveals that men feel more constrained by social norms than women do -- or at least that more men report such feelings than women do.
It's worth noting that neither the editor nor the two contributing authors question the validity of the data sampling (140 undergrads from the University of Saskatchewan). It's also worth noting that, judging from the introductory blurbs, the editor clearly either didn't read or didn't understand the content of the opinion pieces written by the authors. The blurbs twice declare that the pieces contrast the problems of "promiscuous women" with those of "men who can't get laid," but this is simply, objectively untrue; in fact, the problems of "men who can't get laid" (also, in a mockery of sensitivity and journalistic integrity, referred to as "losers" in the article's title) are never addressed by either author.
Stoddard's primary observations on sexual double standards are:
1) Men, for the most part, are expected to comply with a woman's sexual requests even if they are different from the norm, while if the man is the one requesting something out of the ordinary, he is labeled as deviant or disgusting. ("While I’m supposed to honor requests to slap, restrain, throttle, and enable any Sapphic whim a woman may wish to actualize," Stoddard explains, "a libidinous digression from me means putting an already tattered reputation on the line. Technically speaking I’m a man, and as such, I’m obligated to keep it simple.")
2) A woman choosing not to have sex is seen as exercising a right, while a man making the same choice is often humiliated by his sexuality being questioned, either through his ability ("can't get it up?") or his preference ("what, are you gay or something?").
I myself am not experienced enough with Stoddard's first point, although his second point can be verified by any man who has ever turned sex down.
While Stoddard's opinion piece is based mostly on personal experience (providing far too much unwanted insight into the author's sex life), he at least uses the Canadian Journal's study as a launching point, while Breslin rejects the study's findings outright without any explanation other than her own subjective conclusions. Breslin's two main points in arguing that "women have it worse" can be summarized as: 1) it's true because I say it is, and 2) it's true because the Internet says it is.
Yes, Breslin's primary argument against the study's findings is an observation that people on the Internet object to female sexuality. I'd counter with my own observation that people on the Internet object to just about everything, but let's look at Breslin's argument in her own words: "Take a look at the young women who write openly about their sex lives online, and what you’ll find is that trailing along behind them is a line of rabid attackers looking to punish them for doing so."
I'm sure this is true. The Internet provides a voice for every opinion that seems to exist, including extremists, Puritans, and others who would strenuously object to depictions of female sexuality. Do these people reflect the views of society as a whole? Such a conclusion, which Breslin jumps to without question, seems problematic at best.
Breslin provides an example so absurd that it completely destroys what little credibility she has left:
"When Lena Chen . . . posted a shot of her face after oral sex, Gawker pronounced it the “Worst Overshare Anywhere Ever”. . . It’s as if when women choose to exercise their sexual freedoms, men can’t quite figure out whether to love them or hate them for it. What, exactly, are these women being ostracized for—being sexual, experimenting sexually, or having the guts to put themselves out there . . . ?"
Astoundingly, Breslin overlooks the more obvious answer, that Chen is being criticized not for being sexual, but for the graphic nature of her "oversharing." This is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an example of sexual double standards; if Breslin thinks a man could get away with posting a picture of himself dripping with semen, and not be greeted with cries of disgust and outrage, she is clueless indeed. If, on the other hand, she recognizes that a man posting such a graphic picture would receive criticism as well, then her example seriously undermines her own claim that Chen and other such women are the victims of a double standard.
I am not saying that women do not suffer from sexual double standards. I am saying, however, that Breslin's article -- poorly researched, poorly presented, and VERY poorly reasoned -- has failed to convince me of anything other than her own shortsightedness.
It's worth noting that neither the editor nor the two contributing authors question the validity of the data sampling (140 undergrads from the University of Saskatchewan). It's also worth noting that, judging from the introductory blurbs, the editor clearly either didn't read or didn't understand the content of the opinion pieces written by the authors. The blurbs twice declare that the pieces contrast the problems of "promiscuous women" with those of "men who can't get laid," but this is simply, objectively untrue; in fact, the problems of "men who can't get laid" (also, in a mockery of sensitivity and journalistic integrity, referred to as "losers" in the article's title) are never addressed by either author.
Stoddard's primary observations on sexual double standards are:
1) Men, for the most part, are expected to comply with a woman's sexual requests even if they are different from the norm, while if the man is the one requesting something out of the ordinary, he is labeled as deviant or disgusting. ("While I’m supposed to honor requests to slap, restrain, throttle, and enable any Sapphic whim a woman may wish to actualize," Stoddard explains, "a libidinous digression from me means putting an already tattered reputation on the line. Technically speaking I’m a man, and as such, I’m obligated to keep it simple.")
2) A woman choosing not to have sex is seen as exercising a right, while a man making the same choice is often humiliated by his sexuality being questioned, either through his ability ("can't get it up?") or his preference ("what, are you gay or something?").
I myself am not experienced enough with Stoddard's first point, although his second point can be verified by any man who has ever turned sex down.
While Stoddard's opinion piece is based mostly on personal experience (providing far too much unwanted insight into the author's sex life), he at least uses the Canadian Journal's study as a launching point, while Breslin rejects the study's findings outright without any explanation other than her own subjective conclusions. Breslin's two main points in arguing that "women have it worse" can be summarized as: 1) it's true because I say it is, and 2) it's true because the Internet says it is.
Yes, Breslin's primary argument against the study's findings is an observation that people on the Internet object to female sexuality. I'd counter with my own observation that people on the Internet object to just about everything, but let's look at Breslin's argument in her own words: "Take a look at the young women who write openly about their sex lives online, and what you’ll find is that trailing along behind them is a line of rabid attackers looking to punish them for doing so."
I'm sure this is true. The Internet provides a voice for every opinion that seems to exist, including extremists, Puritans, and others who would strenuously object to depictions of female sexuality. Do these people reflect the views of society as a whole? Such a conclusion, which Breslin jumps to without question, seems problematic at best.
Breslin provides an example so absurd that it completely destroys what little credibility she has left:
"When Lena Chen . . . posted a shot of her face after oral sex, Gawker pronounced it the “Worst Overshare Anywhere Ever”. . . It’s as if when women choose to exercise their sexual freedoms, men can’t quite figure out whether to love them or hate them for it. What, exactly, are these women being ostracized for—being sexual, experimenting sexually, or having the guts to put themselves out there . . . ?"
Astoundingly, Breslin overlooks the more obvious answer, that Chen is being criticized not for being sexual, but for the graphic nature of her "oversharing." This is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an example of sexual double standards; if Breslin thinks a man could get away with posting a picture of himself dripping with semen, and not be greeted with cries of disgust and outrage, she is clueless indeed. If, on the other hand, she recognizes that a man posting such a graphic picture would receive criticism as well, then her example seriously undermines her own claim that Chen and other such women are the victims of a double standard.
I am not saying that women do not suffer from sexual double standards. I am saying, however, that Breslin's article -- poorly researched, poorly presented, and VERY poorly reasoned -- has failed to convince me of anything other than her own shortsightedness.
posted by Movie Man at
2:24 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home