Ed's Wife...

[Peter McDermott]

Personally, I always thought there was something suspect about a guy who has both his wife and his mother posting to the same message boards as he does like a familial entourage.

[Peter McDermott]

To be honest, I never really understood the whole Queer Eye premise in Ed's case anyway. OK, I can see that where you have a man who is a complete geek/slob/neanderthal, they might well benefit from having a swift injection from teh gay, in order to add a layer of metrosexual action to their weak game.

And I can see Ed's POV as well. Product to shift, nagging harridan of a wife so I may need a relatively swift upgrade to a later model, etc.

But I can't see how it was a good proposition to the queer eye team. Unless they are all queer for bears?

[bernie]

I kind of agree with NT.

Much ado about nothing.

This line:
[ QUOTE ]
Like every other radical feminist, she is all too eager to start a fracas over any slight even if it is hallucinatory in nature.


[/ QUOTE ]

Is kind of funny though. I guess it only matters if you start/or continue with a slight not matter how small or hallucinatory. Basically, you're doing the same thing you accuse her of. Except you might use the thin excuse that you're defending yourself. But I guess it's not just limited to radical feminists.

b

[UATrewqaz]

I haven't gone through the massive thread yet, but I detect a little over-compensation by her.

My arm-chair psychology diagnosis is that she's actually extremely insecure and has an inferiority complex, even so much it extends to her gender. I think she feels weak and powerless deep down (family issues as a child?) and therefore you see this whole bravado, "I'm so ultra independet and feminist and awesome" act.

Of course I could be wrong, she might very well be an honest to goodness "believer."

I personally can't decide which is worse.

[flair1239]

[ QUOTE ]
You didn't "stand up to a woman". You used one nutjob woman as an example to generalize all "radical" feminists.

[/ QUOTE ]

No he used her as an example of the typical thought processes that a RADICAL (key word there Dids.. Radical, he was careful to specify, there is a difference between a feminist and a radical feminist, for the radical feminist, feminism is a religiion)feminist has. In Elaine's case she is transparent, whereas many of the more sophisticated raidcal feminists are harder to pin down. However Elaine does not have the polish to pretend to be anything but what she is.

I also agree with his assesment of Ed's situation as it relates to Elaine. He is DOA, and will reap much misery on the count of his wife.

[Peter McDermott]

Two points:

- I've never met a radical feminist before that had a website splashed over with pix of her wearing her wedding dress. A real radical feminist would regard that as reproducing an oppressive patriarchal hegemony.

- I've also never met a real radical feminist that lived off her man's roll. While most decry the situation that allows men to earn more than women do for similar work/effort, to be a kept women would involve a lack of economic independence that most would regard as rendering them somewhat akin to a hooker, trading sex and company for money.

On the basis of her writing, Elaine strikes me as one of those people who are of above average intelligence, but are fundamentally lazy and lack the ability to apply themselves. Opts for Women's Studies because it lends her a form of social legitimacy (I'm not unemployed, I'm a post-grad student!) without being too intellectually demanding. Her politics is like everything else in her life -- self-centred, self-indulgent and completely lacking even the pretence of intellectual rigour.

Ed's mum seems kinda hot though. Perhaps that's why he married Elaine? Because she's the anti-hot, and therefore the opposite to his mum?