I was browsing cnn.com for daily news when I ran across a lifestyle article with a title immediately put my "single by choice" hackles up: "Why some single women just need to shut up ."
Written by a woman, let me point out, and a non-single one (she alludes to an SO--and I will use the gender-neutral term even though the author clearly is speaking only to heterosexual women, here). So much sisterhood goin' on in here, telling other women that they shouldn't voice their thoughts and feelings because * gasp * someone might find them annoying!
In the body of the article, the author goes on to discuss what is apparently a new sub-genre of single womens' writing: the "shut the fuck up manifesto", a statement of exactly why they're chosing not to pursue a long-term relationship. The first example , from a middle-aged widow, is one she labels a "happy", a woman she deems to be sufficiently "nice" about her single status, which seems to hinge on "understanding the beauty and wonder--and the blessing--of a good relationship". In other words, admitting that she's more blessed than they are.
The second example , from Megan at Jezebel, whom the author deems a "crappy", because of her supposedly crappy attitude towards being single. She accuses Megan of bitching about how she can't find anyone good enough and of having absurdly high standards that lead to that situation in the first place. First of all, if Megan were inclined to bitch, that's her own business. Sometimes it really does feel like dating is all chaff and no wheat. Second, there's really no bitchery in it all; it's just as positive in tone as the first piece.
In fact, Megan's piece is in no way against dating or long-term relationships, it's merely a statement that she's done both before but right now single is where she wants to be--and that it's a damn better place to be than in a relationship you're clinging to just to avoid being alone.
Honestly, what the cnn.com article smacks of, more than anything else, is the author feeling like she is not being sufficiently revered by her own single friends for finding a partner. Or that she dislikes Megan and is willing to read hostility into anything she writes. Or perhaps even that she's missing her own single days but doesn't want to admit to it.
Whatever one's particular decisions regarding dating and relationships, can't we please just be civil and accept each other's reasons? Preferably withou t the need for me to write an essay on "The Reasons You Should Fuck Off and Mind Your Own Love Life"?
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: "Happies" and "Crappies": Feh to All That!.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/13352
But bear in mind, YOU aren't perfect, and there's not going to be a perfect person for you. If you refuse to settle for anything less, you're going to be lonely for a very, very long time.
I have a problem with this line. Of course, no one's "perfect," but why should someone lower her standards just to get into a relationship? I guess I am destined to be one of those women who "refuse[s] to settle for anything less," and I'm okay with that!
But not being in a (heterosexual, it seems) relationship is the WORST THING THAT CAN HAPPEN TO A WOMAN.
Apparently.
Yeah, that little "threat" in there bothered the heck out of me.
Me too.
One telling quotation by Atterberry of the "crappy" Jezebel writer Megan is:
"I'm alone because I eschewed goal-oriented dating and 'trying to find someone' " which is missing what comes afterward: "...in favor of seeing what happened with this guy, this time, one guy at a time (more or less)"
In this line, Megan is saying that instead of dating in big pools, perhaps multiple people at a time, she was a serial monogamist, perhaps even to the point of going on dates with only a single person at a time. And it's true: this method is a little less efficient, less "goal-oriented," but it's all a matter of preference. Instead, Atterberry twists it into a straw man attack on a "crappy" who is against all dating.
It's amazing to think that we really do split people into the binary of "with someone" or "not with someone." Dating casually, having close friends, having close ties with family, etc. etc.; these are all important, and if we gave all these things their due, married women like Atterberry wouldn't be anxious about what non-married women thought about them, nor vice versa.
If she is sooooooooo happy in her relationship, then why the desperate need to prove it? And why the desperate need to critisize and label single women?
Methinks it is indeed a secret desire from her to sleep alone again!!
Hold on a minute, now.
She doesn't say that being single is the worst thing in the world.
She says the opposite, "if you prefer your single-ness, more power to you, sister!" kind of thing.
Her problem is with single women who whine about their lack of options, when maybe the problem is with their ridiculously high standards.
Don't we all know someone like that? (Granted, I know both men and women who expect perfection in a partner, but don't expect anything in themselves...)
My problem with the article is that she doesn't mention the women who -are- actively looking, and having no luck. Which can be frustrating.
But how does someone's relationship choice affect the writer? So someone's single, and unhappy about it. Why does she need to be judgmental? Why does she infer that women need to "shut up" about it? There's the implication that women who are single and wish they were otherwise have no *right* to complain.
Yes, there are single people that often lament their single status. Do married people ever complain about marriage? Or their marriage with children? Um, YES. Relationships and how people run them are their decision though, and it's not a matter of being one label or another. The judgment and simplification are just so irritating.
I know sometimes with friends, it can be hard to listen to recurring relationship issues. There are kinder ways of navigating through that, though, then telling someone to "stop whining" and saying it's their fault for not putting themselves out there enough, or expecting too much.
wow.
First, I don't see any difference in attitude between the "happy" and the "crappy."
Second, who the hell is this woman to tell other women how they should feel? That they should go out and "dress nice" and "smile"? Bull.
And god forbid Megan wants special rather than nice. Didn't you all know that settling is god's plan for us, not to mention what nice girls do?
It's actually really interesting to read all the comments. This one got me a little mad:
Okay, so how can an article written by a woman be sexist against women, even if the author is bitter?
Is this guy saying that sexist ideas can't be imposed by women?? What is up with that??
One paragraph in that article really struck me :
"Take care of yourself, dress well, look good every time you go outside. Smile at people when you're out and about, make small talk in check-out lines, keep your radar up at all times. You never know when the right person for you will be rounding the next corner."
It seemed like the writer was calling for women to be constantly on Husband Alert every moment at the day!
So you can't just put on a pair of sweatpants and a t shirt to run out to get a quart of milk and some fruit.
And you have to act cheerful at all times, even if you just got laid off, or your doctor told you that you have to have heart surgery.
And you have to be chatty with every random stranger who comes up - even the ones that set off all of your weirdo alarm bells - because he might be "the one".
That sounds like a truly awful way to live!
In fact, it sounds pretty damned crappy!