Maureen Dowd: Feminist or...not?

[BlueIris]

Just curious about what others think. I caught a few minutes of her interview with Charlie Rose about her book, "Are Men Really Necessary?" and was not thrilled with the comments she made about feminism, the nature of her column topics, etc. (for instance, when Charlie Rose claimed that she "knew" her last few columns were going to incite provocative discussions about gender roles, actually calling those discussions, presumably among women, "cat-fights," and her response was, among other stupid things, "cat-fights are good business.") I realize that in mass media, and even Rose has lost credibility with me as he has been absorbed into the substanceless propaganda machine of the deeply misogynist MSM, we can't always expect successful women who may be feminists to get fair treatment about their perspectives on feminism from an interviewer; maybe Dowd has come to expect to get screwed whenever she mentions feminism in an interview and has started being, er, coy and sarcastic about it. I don't know. The impression that I got was that she was playing dumb, being passive aggressive and not doing the best job of representing the ideas in her work by copping out like that. I confess, if there's one thing I hate more than women who claim they aren't feminists, it's women who are, and won't admit it, for fear of "threatening" a male fan-base or readership, which was my impression of what she was doing there. (I also hate it when anyone, male, female, transgendered, plays dumb. Hate that. Respecting yourself and your ideas, especially when it comes to an expensive book you've written, is more important than whether someone tries to make you look stupid, or even if they succeed. Your intelligent listeners will "get it," you know? Be a grown-up.)

So, basically, I was disappointed in what I saw of her commentary about herself in which she mentioned feminism. Really disappointed. Then it occurred to me--has she ever claimed to be a feminist? Do others think of her that way? Googling produced mixed results, so I thought I'd ask proud, self-proclaimed feminists around here for their opinions.

[ismnotwasm]

1. I've always felt that she was an opportunist

She has a remarkable journalistic instinct for which way the wind is blowing and subtly alters her commentary. She is not going to say "I am a feminist" She isn't going to say "I'm not a feminist" either. In fact, I would love to see an interview where someone asked her that question point blank.
There are some very powerful women in politics right now. Women with real voices. People are listening to them, sometimes without even considering their sex. Her new book is capitalizing on that as far as I'm concerned--opportunistic, as usual. The title is polarizing--deliberately I'm sure (the reviews of the book sound like it's not too bad but the title itself is bullshit.) I won't be reading it.
She, like so many (I'm not a feminist but) women who have risen in there careers ride on the backs and the sacrifices that feminists have made.

But to actually use the word? Feminist? Don't think so. It's been too sullied by media misrepresentation (think feminazi)for her to take that chance, even though I believe she could get away with it and still be successful. She has the talent to frame the word in a way that challenges the current media perception. I've never particularly enjoyed her writing, no matter if it was Clinton bashing or making fun of Rumsfield.

[Hello_Kitty]

2. What I've gathered so far

I haven't read the book, nor do I intend to. I'm not a fan of Dowd's and frankly don't understand her popularity. My usual thought when reading one of her columns or seeing her interviewed is "Huh?". She writes and speaks indecipherable gibberish to me and I guess a lot of folks mistake that for a sign of deep intelligence. :shrug:

As for her latest ramblings on feminism, I guess she's trying to say feminism has failed because she can't get a date. Whatever Maureen. Perhaps she'd enjoy a return to pre-feminist America. Where she'd be sorting her husband's socks in front of the TV rather than being paid buckets of money to pontificate about nothing.

[ismnotwasm]

3. yeah, she kind of rambles

Once in a while she'll hit a home run and sound like she knows what she's talking about. I usually will find links to those particular columns on liberal websites. But most of her stuff is unreadable crap. It's really sad when a woman of influence writes like she does. It's very chickenshit and I have no respect for it.

[MuseRider]

6. Feminism is successful

because you don't NEED a date.

Not a fan here either.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

4. Well, let's see ...........

She's an unmarried woman, working and succeeding in a still-male-dominated profession, supporting herself, living the life she wants to live.

Yeah, by my definition, she's a feminist. She's made her choices and she's living with them.

[Book Lover]

5. Feminist, yes; but more importantly

she is a classist; her bullshit book should have been focused on how class affects those women's choices, instead of gender being her sole focus. Then again, that wouldn't have made good marketing copy, and there's no such thing as a development editor anymore...

[Finder]

7. I don't understand how there can be any question..

of whether she is a feminist. She is one of my favs.