Next we must force ourselves to remember that this front-page story is echoed by a thousand untold stories about unknown women who have died or been killed or driven to fatal addictions just because they were pretty. These women died because they were meat on the banquet table of predatory men. Their deaths must not be seen as merely tragic accidents, but as cautionary tales for us all, and particularly for men who are taught to see women as playthings and not as human beings made, as religious folk like me would say, in the image of God.
What's striking about this line of argument is that it does to Anna Nicole Smith exactly what it complains about. It robs her of her humanity. She made a series of decisions, some of which worked out well for her and some of which were disastrous. To say that she was merely meat for powerful men denies her own agency and says that whatever she does is meaningless except for how it effects powerful men.
8 comments:
Good point. Even with the career choices she chose for herself, this ending wasn't in the cards. Many women have been models and Playboy centerfolds without destroying their lives through drugs and toxic relationships.
Oh, you're going to get letters. Twenty or thirty at least just from Peter.
I thought that it was really funny that they found Slim-Fast in her fridge, considering that she was a paid spokesperson for Trim Spa, a competing diet aid.
Guess that tells us all that we need to know about the effectiveness of Trim Spa.
Guys die or are driven to fatal addictions all the time by their athletic talents or aspirations.
This Wall Street Journal has a more balanced take.
Rabbi Gellman seems to completely overlook the power she exercised, almost certainly cynically, over others.
... for men who are taught to see women as playthings and not as human beings made, as religious folk like me would say, in the image of God.
Perhaps I got the teaching wrong, but doesn't the Bible say women were made from men for men?
Peter: Actually, this is something I believe strongly. Civilization, and western civilization in particular, are not imposed upon women by men. Nor, for that matter, is it true that women use sex to lure men into civilization. Instead, almost all cultures are the result of a consensual process (albeit, not a democratic process) agreed to by the sexes.
One of the problems with the Rawlsian theory of justice is that Rawls was wrong about what people would choose ex ante. It is entirely possible, if given certain facts about strength and technology, that people would choose for women to have what today's women reject as a inferior position in society. Just because a relationship (and I don't here mean sexual relationship) is between "inferior" and "superior" does not mean that it is necessarily non-consensual.
The United States has gone through (to some extent is still going through) to huge revolutions in inferior/superior relationships. One started 150 years ago, involved a bloody war, has torn the country apart both literally and figuratively and still is not done. The other started 30 or 40 years ago and is basically completed, although there are still details to be worked out. It seems to me plain that one was consensual and the other was non-consensual.
So, to bring this back to Anna Nicole Smith, I'm not defending the culture in which she lived. The culture is in many ways degenerate. But I completely reject the idea that she was a mere puppet, responding to the world men have made.
Skipper: Eve was made from Adam's rib and her role was, at first, defined in terms of her relationship with him. Still, today, we see the argument that the good Christian wife is a faithful helpmate to her husband.
On the other hand, the Bible clearly treats women as independent actors and moral creatures in their own right. They get to talk to G-d and be prophets. They get to act righteously, or sin, and not simply be judged based on how their husband acts.
The Conservative movement is trying to work its way through this at the moment, but is doing a poor job. Individual congregations are given the choice of including the "Matriarchs" in any prayer that lists the Patriarchs (i.e., Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). I have no problem with the listing of Sarah but think that the fundamental political correctness gone awry nature of this trend is betrayed by the inclusion of Leah.
Gee, Peter, I think that the second half of your post does a better job of answering the first half than I could possibly do. That's exactly the consensus mechanism that I'm talking about. I might quibble here and there: I see the vote as a relatively minor right and, in the US, women's suffrage was more conservative in nature than it is currently seen as having been. But, on the whole, women, in increasing numbers, wanted to change the default assumptions about their role in society, and so we did.
The more interesting question is what to make of women in non-western societies who claim to be happy with their lot. I'm thinking here particularly of those Arab women who get trotted out on a regular basis to say how much they love the Chador and their concomitant freedom from western hyper-sexualization. What do you and Rabbi Gellman have to say to that?
For myself, I find it genuinely troubling. Of course, these women are carefully chosen and their are scattered Arab feminists. But what if women in Arab countries do actually prefer their situation to the equality found in the west? Oroborous says that we should ignore their moral code and go in and impose our own. But why can't Arab social mores be consensual, even if not equal?
David:
Oroborous says that we should ignore their moral code and go in and impose our own.
I don't think he actually said that.
Rather, he was -- successfully -- posing a conundrum.
But why can't Arab social mores be consensual, even if not equal?
I'm not sure you phrased your question carefully enough.
American social mores are not "equal," in any sense of the term.
Rather, American economic mores are largely characterized by equality of opportunity.
I don't think it is possible to consider any majority Muslim country to be consensual.
Post a Comment