Cosmopolitan Feminist: Why, It's Insulting to Women to Suggest They're Interested in Weddings, Dresses, and Other Girly Things!

Okay, so put aside the fact that the magazine that Jill Filopovic (or whatever) works for bases its entire business model on the idea that women are interested in weddings, dresses, and other girlish things.

I mean: Come on. I've seen Cosmopolitan covers. Cosmo covers do not feature Boutros-Boutros Ghali.

The headlines splattered on the cover do not promise to inform readers about about the European currency union.

This is just so common, the denial of reality, the insistence that an Idealized and also non-existent paragon of femalehood must be pretended to be the reality.

And what's also so common is how partisan this is. Feminists are not "feminists;" they are simply the Ladies Auxiliary for the Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party. They do not announce a philosophy, but merely a political platform.

And being the Democrat Club for Girlz, they have to attack Republican women for putting together funny ads, like this one, a parody of Say Yes to the Dress, a reality tv show about wedding dresses primarily watched by, get this, women:

Funny? Eh, I think it's amusing. I like when the mom applauds wildly for the Democrats' plan to explode the budget.

I'm not the target audience here of course, but I suppose to even say that I'm not the target audience is itself sexist and misogynist and anti-women, because that would imply that women are more keenly interested in Wedding Dresses than heterosexual men are.

And I mean: Look, that's just absurd. We all know that women are heterosexual men are equally as interested in wedding dresses, make-up tips, fashion, and celebrity gossip.

Absolutely 100% equal. Why, I can't even tell you how many times per day I check Perez Hilton just to make sure I've not missed out on some breaking Bennifer news!

But even so, here's the problem with a Cosmo Feminist attacking this ad for being sexist:

Cosmo just ran its own ad in favor of voting (wink wink -- just make sure you vote for the right people) featuring make-up tips and other girlish things as the hook to grab readers' interest.

So what's the objective problem here?

There is no objective problem.

The problem is that one ad supports a Republican, and the other ad supports progressives.

And that's it. There is no real philosophical objection here; there is no objective principle at stake.

All there is is partisan animus. The Ladies' Auxiliary of the Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party doesn't mind one ad, because it jibes with their politics, and objects to the other, because it doesn't.

Period.

posted by Ace at 02:32 PM

| Access Comments