Lately, have you felt ill, queasy, mysteriously adrip, without clear cause as to why? Do your guts and brains reel about as if you had ingested bad clams and a quart of gin?
Now, it's easy enough to gawk at a Camille Paglia emanation and exclaim at the brazen idiocy, the idiotic brazenity, the vapid megalomania, the megalomaniacal vapidity. It's a lot harder to answer: who the fuck even buys this shit?
Camille Paglia is taken seriously by precisely whom?
Well, I'm glad you asked.
The quality of discourse for women today is poor.
Long dumb quote to follow, steady on. PUNCHLINE APPROACHING.
Notable recent examples of unproductive chattering: Naomi Wolf has created a new range of vagina puns with her anecdotal account of her technicolor orgasms in her latest book Vagina. The Life of Julia is a left-looking faceless cartoon claiming that women need government to take care of them. (I linked to Iowahawk’s parody because the original is too depressing.) Hanna Rosin seeks to convince us that replacing domineering men with domineering women amounts to positive progress. And a fan fiction author addicted to “shouty capitals,” E.L. James, captured the imagination of women across the English-speaking world with a poor specimen of a bondage novel that has since spun off a line of sex toys with little Fifty Shades of Grey logo tags. (British comment threads are always informative. Why pay for trademarked logo pleasure balls when limes work just as well?)
So we have four books cited as examples of how grossly oversimplified, even glib, is our discourse as to Women, because they are all media-friendly sound bites.... who will save us....
Missing has been someone to show how absurd this all is.
Who is our savior?
Re-enter Camille Paglia, the “pro-sex, pro-porn, pro-art, pro-beauty, pro-pop” sixties feminist and heavily published art and culture critic, quiet for the past few years while writing her latest book due out on October 16
Yes, re-enter Camille Paglia! PUNCHLINE LANDING.
Everything the PJs person quotes directly from Paglia is hilariously wrong.
But it gets, here, awesome:
Paglia’s book is about art — all of it, not just the stuff deemed art by the coastal elites — but the range of issues she covered in that short Salon interview alone can spawn discussions ranging from the fate of publishing to protest voting for Green Party candidate Jill Stein to the “formidable and capable [homeschooling women driving the Tea Party] whom feminism has foolishly ignored.” In fact, Paglia wrote this book for those homeschooling moms.
Paglia wrote this book for those homeschooling moms.
I shit you not.
MAS. This dingaling decides to violate Bill Watterson's copyrights in defense of the thesis that
Much of second- and third-wave Feminism clings either to the notion that women can and want to be like men or that there is no feminine or masculine nature. More broadly, much of modern liberalism relies on the fallacy that humans are essentially good, only corrupted by society. Paglia thinks this is nonsense on stilts. She believes that Nature exists, that it “indiscriminately exerts its force” on us.
She is not of the Right, because she disagrees on how to handle our dark nature — for example, Paglia would have society accept pornography as a release valve while conservatives typically would have us strive for self-control but both insist on confronting the darkness; to deny it, as the Left does, is naive and dangerous.
“Human beings are not nature’s favorites. We are merely one of a multitude of species upon which nature indiscriminately exerts its force.” This is the basis of her cultural criticism. She uses art as evidence. With Paglia on the interview circuit, women’s debates — and the rest of our cultural dialogues — should get more interesting again. They might even become productive.
Nobody gives a shit about this pretend bullshit. BORED NOW.