Should Ann Coulter be a feminist icon?
| By Ben Adler - Aug 15th, 2006 at 10:23 pm EDT |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
Obviously not. And Ellie Reeve's argument in TNR today that she should be is remarkably weak, even considering what she has to work with. First of all, the crux of her argument is supported by zero evidence. She says:
And being as representative a liberal as Ellie, I suppose it's worth pointing out that I disagree with every example she gives. To wit:
Ellie also tries to argue that Coulter should be admired by feminists for her cojones, and it seems to me that would be her strongest point if she drew it out a little more. But then she'd have to explain why feminists should admire someone who suggested that women should lose their right to vote (she doesn't mention this.) Also, she does mention that Coulter refers to women she disagrees with as "broads" and men she disagrees with as "fags". How, pray tell, is that feminist?
Finally, Ellie asserts that "we" liberals respond to Coulter by denigrating her looks. But by far the harshest quote in that vein she provides comes from Andrew Sullivan, a self-professed conservative. I suppose "liberal counter-intuition" might be one generous description for this piece, but, pace Mike Tomasky "liberal self-flagellation"--the idea that its our fault we hate Ann Coulter and a prominent conservative says bad things about her--would be more accurate.
Coulter shocks and offends, but underneath her offensiveness is a grain of truth that people cope with by critiquing her hair....This would be an interesting point if she had any empirical evidence that any of Coulter's outrageous comments were either true in some objective sense or that many liberals actually agree with them. She provides neither. Rather she simply proffers examples where she herself was amused.
Coulter has said some terrible things. But I don't think it's the terrible things that really bother liberals. Coulter makes us cringe not when she lies, but when she says things we wish weren't true.
And being as representative a liberal as Ellie, I suppose it's worth pointing out that I disagree with every example she gives. To wit:
Asked to define the First Amendment: "An excuse for overweight women to dance in pasties and The New York Times to commit treason."Hardy har har. I don't smile on the inside when Coulter describes The Times as treasonous, and I'll venture a guess that most liberals would say the same.
Ellie also tries to argue that Coulter should be admired by feminists for her cojones, and it seems to me that would be her strongest point if she drew it out a little more. But then she'd have to explain why feminists should admire someone who suggested that women should lose their right to vote (she doesn't mention this.) Also, she does mention that Coulter refers to women she disagrees with as "broads" and men she disagrees with as "fags". How, pray tell, is that feminist?
Finally, Ellie asserts that "we" liberals respond to Coulter by denigrating her looks. But by far the harshest quote in that vein she provides comes from Andrew Sullivan, a self-professed conservative. I suppose "liberal counter-intuition" might be one generous description for this piece, but, pace Mike Tomasky "liberal self-flagellation"--the idea that its our fault we hate Ann Coulter and a prominent conservative says bad things about her--would be more accurate.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Much like a rich entrepeneur who later attacks tax equality to allow other small businesses to succeed, or our good friend at YAF Jason Mattera who opposed Affirmative Action while receiving a minority scholarship, Coulter toes the conservative line of opposing feminism while riding the success of female career advancement in the later 20th century.
For all her various comedy routines about her hatred of liberals and feminism, Coulter is a never-married, over-40 single woman who opted out of being a stay-at-home mother to instead enroll in law school and later become a self-operating freelance professional. The only statement Coulter truly has to be offering the feminist movement of the 60's is "thank you."
All the writer really reveals is that:
a) Ann Coulter is self-confident.
b) The writer has an insipid sense of humor.
c) The writer finds a kernel of truth in what Ann Coulter says.
I do have a shred of respect for Ann Coulter, because she's gotten rich by lying to stupid people, and few things are quite that American. But I still consider her to be beneath me or most any other thinking person.
I also disagree with the author on the third point: For the most part, I don't think there's a kernel of truth in what Ann Coulter writes.
Even if those were true, though, labelling Ann Coulter "a feminist icon" would be every bit as silly.