I want to acquaint you with a blog post that will make it clear why I shun North American feminist theory, avoid North American feminist blogs as much as I can, and hide in the toilet whenever I see people from our university’s Gender Studies program.
The blogger in question addresses some really idiotic comments made by some aging freakazoid:
Does parenthood imperil the skills of a money trader? Apparently it does. Only, however, if the trader is female.
That’s the take of Paul Tudor Jones, a billionaire who made his money as a hedge fund manager, in this comment while speaking to prospective hedge-funders at the University of Virginia: “Jones said in his experience having a child is a ‘killer’ for any desire to trade, adding ‘as soon as that baby’s lips touched that girl’s bosom, forget it,’ while motioning to his chest, according to a video posted by the Washington Post.”
Obviously, a person whose parents hated him enough to give him a name that contains both “Tudor” and “Jones” had little chance of growing up normal and psychologically healthy. Yet, since Tudor is now an adult, his mental issues become his own responsibility and it is up to him to make sure that he doesn’t dump his psychological dirt on other human beings.
The linked blogger gives Tudor a proper dressing down, pointing out how ridiculous his generalizations about the nature of women are. I really enjoyed the post because it was funny, well-written, and intelligent. That is, I enjoyed it until I arrived at the closing paragraphs:
Recent studies have proven women to be better traders and money handlers, less inclined to take dire risks, more able to render profit to their clients. Perhaps they regard the money in their accounts as their “baby”, thus deserving of nurturing care? It’s a skill and approach many males could learn and profit from.
In response to offensive generalizations about women’s nature, the blogger thinks it is appropriate to offer a string of . . . offensive generalizations about women’s nature that in no way contradict Tudor Jones’s opinions.
I have had to read quite a lot of feminist theory for work and I can assure you that no patriarchal fundamentalist can emit as many essentialist statements about the nurturing nature of women and the 100% different nature of men as a regular American feminist. Many people have this completely pig-headed belief that feminism is about taking up the old essentialist generalizations about “men” and “women” and affixing the label “bad” to the former and “good” to the latter. This is the habit of lazy minds that can’t escape the comforting reliance on familiar binaries. Nothing more complex than “bad” and “good” is accessible to them.
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment