Ah, the good ol’ days of academia, when misogyny was practiced with a carefree and exuberant spirit!
I was reading a scholarly article published in the late 1960s (really, not all that long ago), in which the author makes the case that there is a critical difference between reading a text as “personal” (specific, individual) and as “impersonal” (general, universal). His example?
Quote: “It is the difference between ‘Women are bitches’ and ‘My wife is a bitch.’”
Needless to say, the article has nothing to do with wives or bitches.
I am overjoyed knowing that, once upon a time (not so long ago), neither author, nor editor, nor peer-reviewers said to themselves, “Hey, that example is totally unnecessary. And, um, rather offensive.”
This dude probably got tenure with shit like this.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 5, 2008 at 4:58 pm
squadratomagico
I have to say, this really cracked me up. I’m still grinning… I think it’s the irony of someone using such an intimate example as a means of critiquing personalized reading practices.
July 5, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Sisyphus
There was definitely something in the water between 68-71 in academia … I just read a whole bunch of monographs from then that were obsessed with calling this novel’s one character a “bitch-goddess” —-I have read it over and over and found no references in the original novel to either word; and she’s no Ma Joad or Little Eva, but really, where the hell are they getting this bitch-goddess idea? WTF?
July 7, 2008 at 7:07 pm
kfluff
Let me just say that I once worked at an institution in which a senior colleague explained—in a committee meeting—that he knew how to handle women because his house was full of them: his wife, his daughter, his DOG. All women are bitches, indeed.