Anyone else getting irritated beyond redemption by the media's constant, incessant use of the phrase "strong independent woman in charge of her own life?"
I hear that phrase so often now that I receive it with a mere yawn and an eyeroll. And then I flip to the next page out of boredom.
Look, magg writers and editors. You need to understand something about your chosen profession. It appears you need a crash course on good writing. You need to stop repeating the same exact phrase inj all of your articles, your answers to letters to the editor, your feature snippets on celebrities or whatever. This trite, insipid phrase is being over-used as a solution for every possible hypothetical situation.
You're just giving your readers some cliched, rehashed, warmed-over banality, like day-old barbecue sauce that's been sitting out in the sun for the last eighteen hours. It is usually either this or some very closely-related synonymous permutation thereof.
When that is your answer to everything, to absolutely EVERYTHING, to every possible dilemma and conflict that could confront any reader or any woman, it loses all meaning. It is the same answer they use for trivial, inane crap, like one time a____ Same with that annoying cesspool of a TV show "seuu and the city." They also hack this phrase to death, or some variation.
It just trivializes the phrase so that it no longer holds any worth. It's like, okay, well, they use this phrase so much repeatedly for wildly divergent situations. Therefore it could not possibly have any actual substance to it. If a phrase is used over and over again, no matter what the actual subject matter of the article, then said phrase is worn out so much that it has lost any impact whatsoever.
That indicates that it is empty and fake, and it is simply presented for show only. This is not quality writing. People are just going to read it and think, oh good grief, that phrase again.
It's not just the phrase, I might add. It is also the tone -- the harsh, lecturing, infuriatedness (I need a word stronger than “fury”) that conveys a weird emotion from the article writers. It’s as if you are preemptively accusing anyone that does not agree with you, of being closed-minded and sexist and hating women. I don't mind lectures in the general sense, but not from someone with an observed mental capacity lower than mine.
They like gardening? They are a strong liberated woman. They like masturbating? They are "". They moved to a different city recently? They """". They bought a lampshade recently? They are """. They had a one-night stand at a club with some random stranger dude? They are """.
I keep seeing that same old, same old, and I roll my eyes in exasperation and boredom. And I think to myself, oh for goodness' sake. They're still using that tired, dead old schtick? Those magazine people seriously need to find a fresh, new, original approach to their business. This is bad journalism.
Not only that, but I find it incredibly *patronizing.* It is as if they assume that their readers, or that the average woman, is too stupid to decide for herself whether or not some activity is truly empowering. Thanks, but I don't need a goddamn glossy fashion mag to make me liberated, empowered, etc.
That is the other tone of the crappy writing that I could not quite place before. So this is what is meant when an individual or a concept or opinion is patronizing. Hunh. It is the laughably condescending attitude that all these women's mags have. They are furious because they are subliminally saying, "we are telling you what makes you a strong woman or not. We are telling you what you should and should not be proud of. And if you don't agree with this, then you are stupid and bad and conservative." They think they are patting the general readership on the head. They believe they have to do the thinking because readers do not have the cognitive capacity.
I say "laughably" because I don't buy it for a second. I already know what is and isn't empowering. I know from true feminism. I know from my strong cultural heritage. I know what makes me happy. I know from my family and roots. I already have an identity. I don't need your pseudo, makeshift, pitiable, sorry excuse for an identity.
And I find it quite pathetic that these silly women's mags have taken it upon themselves to try to tell me what I should and should not have as my sociopolitical opinions.
I hear that phrase so often now that I receive it with a mere yawn and an eyeroll. And then I flip to the next page out of boredom.
Look, magg writers and editors. You need to understand something about your chosen profession. It appears you need a crash course on good writing. You need to stop repeating the same exact phrase inj all of your articles, your answers to letters to the editor, your feature snippets on celebrities or whatever. This trite, insipid phrase is being over-used as a solution for every possible hypothetical situation.
You're just giving your readers some cliched, rehashed, warmed-over banality, like day-old barbecue sauce that's been sitting out in the sun for the last eighteen hours. It is usually either this or some very closely-related synonymous permutation thereof.
When that is your answer to everything, to absolutely EVERYTHING, to every possible dilemma and conflict that could confront any reader or any woman, it loses all meaning. It is the same answer they use for trivial, inane crap, like one time a____ Same with that annoying cesspool of a TV show "seuu and the city." They also hack this phrase to death, or some variation.
It just trivializes the phrase so that it no longer holds any worth. It's like, okay, well, they use this phrase so much repeatedly for wildly divergent situations. Therefore it could not possibly have any actual substance to it. If a phrase is used over and over again, no matter what the actual subject matter of the article, then said phrase is worn out so much that it has lost any impact whatsoever.
That indicates that it is empty and fake, and it is simply presented for show only. This is not quality writing. People are just going to read it and think, oh good grief, that phrase again.
It's not just the phrase, I might add. It is also the tone -- the harsh, lecturing, infuriatedness (I need a word stronger than “fury”) that conveys a weird emotion from the article writers. It’s as if you are preemptively accusing anyone that does not agree with you, of being closed-minded and sexist and hating women. I don't mind lectures in the general sense, but not from someone with an observed mental capacity lower than mine.
They like gardening? They are a strong liberated woman. They like masturbating? They are "". They moved to a different city recently? They """". They bought a lampshade recently? They are """. They had a one-night stand at a club with some random stranger dude? They are """.
I keep seeing that same old, same old, and I roll my eyes in exasperation and boredom. And I think to myself, oh for goodness' sake. They're still using that tired, dead old schtick? Those magazine people seriously need to find a fresh, new, original approach to their business. This is bad journalism.
Not only that, but I find it incredibly *patronizing.* It is as if they assume that their readers, or that the average woman, is too stupid to decide for herself whether or not some activity is truly empowering. Thanks, but I don't need a goddamn glossy fashion mag to make me liberated, empowered, etc.
That is the other tone of the crappy writing that I could not quite place before. So this is what is meant when an individual or a concept or opinion is patronizing. Hunh. It is the laughably condescending attitude that all these women's mags have. They are furious because they are subliminally saying, "we are telling you what makes you a strong woman or not. We are telling you what you should and should not be proud of. And if you don't agree with this, then you are stupid and bad and conservative." They think they are patting the general readership on the head. They believe they have to do the thinking because readers do not have the cognitive capacity.
I say "laughably" because I don't buy it for a second. I already know what is and isn't empowering. I know from true feminism. I know from my strong cultural heritage. I know what makes me happy. I know from my family and roots. I already have an identity. I don't need your pseudo, makeshift, pitiable, sorry excuse for an identity.
And I find it quite pathetic that these silly women's mags have taken it upon themselves to try to tell me what I should and should not have as my sociopolitical opinions.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment