Friday, January 08, 2010

The Flight of the Tweety Birds

It appears that the Flight of the Tweety Birds is this week's cause du jour among the geek women bloggers. The claims are getting evermore snarky and meant to justify a round of 'serious' web generation mystique but don't seem to offer a basis for complaint. Instead they are the victims of old people, old business, just old. Old frightens them. It could be they were had except the article was written by someone who isn't old and isn't that tied to old media. Vanity Fair is a glamour mag and glamour mags don't take up serious topics. If they did, they'd be Playboy. Sad but so.

The claim that gets to the heart of their complaint is one made by Felicia Day, that the author of the Vanity Fair piece failed:

to celebrate a new kind of independent and liberated woman

I guess she doesn't have the awareness to notice she is practicing the same sexist agism and generationism that got her into the mess. Ok, Felicia, somehow you think you are new? Challlenge: exactly how are you the example of a new independent liberated woman? What is it you've achieved that say, Carly Fiorina hasn't? Meg Whitman? Susan Sarandon? Dolly Parton? Over a million followers on Twitter? So now you have the power to change exactly what? Your fellow bloggers say you and they want to have THAT conversation, so get on with it.

You want to sling arrows because you believe you've been trivialized. Great. Just be sure you have a full quiver and a solid stance in the saddle because you're accelerating into the curve on a running horse, not out of it. The complaints you have and that of your fellow bloggers read like Danah Boyd crying over her Twitter-wall experience at her presentation. In other words, it's infantilism vs agism and somehow none of you seem to understand if you put your sex up front, it is the topic. Smart women or men get that and run with it. Hypocrites or just plain too full-of-themselves repeat the remarks that have stereotyped you as the whiniest generation since the Jazz Age. New and different? How? Say it or STFU because there are real victims out there who need attention a lot more than a 30 something living in LA with the TwitterNation hanging on her every burp.

Compared to Neda Soltan what have you suffered lately?

Nothing is more boring than a successful anything that complains when the spotlight turns green. Like the sign at Wentzel's says, if you want a place in the sun, expect blisters. Otherwise, get over yourself, or at least take a moment to study the career of Lenny Bruce. When commedians or commediennes turn serious, the laughter stops and so does the applause.


Amber said...

Damn straight. Seriously, I don't know what else to say. Between this and the stupid bra game it seems women are intent keeping themselves in the dark ages or allowing someone else to do it for them. Grow up already.

John Cowan said...

Amber: It's not about women, it's about attentivores. Only the surface content is specific to women.

Len Bullard said...

"Attentivores". I like that. It says it all. I will steal that with anonymous attribution so you won't get caught in the firestorm coming my way.

Amber said...

John, I don't know about that. I love "attentivores", but I really can't remember the last time I heard a man whining about not being taken seriously when he's doing something trivial and calling it work (Ashton Kutcher, the tweetissimo, comes to mind here). At least not publicly.

Len Bullard said...

They're bit because they got caught taking themselves seriously as glamour girls when they brand themselves as geek divas. It's an oxymoron image wise. The crux of it is these girls are very proud of themselves and they let themselves be put in a magazine that can't tell that story because the idea of geekdiva as glamour girl contradicts what Vanity Fair sells. Oopsie.

Amber said...

Oopsie indeed. And EXACTLY.

John Cowan said...

Amber, consider what plagiarists (male and female) say when caught. Whine and wriggle is the rule of the day. The only plagiarist who manned up (or in her case, acted like a lady) was the late Molly Ivins.

Len, feel free to credit me or not as you choose: I know how to deal with controversy.

Len Bullard said...

Done. I quoted both of you. At least at Day's blog, the controversy will die down, IMO, because she will realize this is not really a great conversation for her career. As I said, when commedienne's get serious, they get boring, and otherwise, they walked into the interview eyes wide open. If the story is about them, they are attentivores protesting too much when burned. If the story is about the Lolita Effect, then it doesn't apply to them because they are not girls, they are 30 somethings and make up their own minds. If it is about how the lolita effect creating a culture where such stories are expected and define them even though they have other accomplishments, it has legs.

The problem is all the social media sales folks are diving in to make hay out of the spotlight while it lasts and that tends to reinforce the insipid hollowness of the social media industry although the herd pile on is exactly how it works. As people realize that, they become more disgusted with it; so if you become the avatar for the story as Day has, it's nothing but bad.

So if she has the media savvy she is reputed to have, she'll move on. One correspondent there claims the "major" figures will go on and fight this fight. Good luck with changing human nature.

Comment Policy

If you don't sign it, I won't post it. To quote an ancient source: "All your private property is target for your enemy. And your enemy is me."