rants & ramblings

Sunday, October 30, 2005

Modern Girls, Chimera, Screwed

There is an article in the NYT today that has terrified me: What's a Modern Girl to Do? by Maureen Dowd. There are some excellent quotes, but what it boils down to is a pretty dismal outlook for the future, especially if you are smart, confident and sarcastic (all of which could be said about me).

Dowd writes: "I took the idealism and passion of the 60's for granted, simply assuming we were sailing toward perfect equality with men, a utopian world at home and at work. I didn't listen to [my mother] when she cautioned me about the chimera of equality." Chimera is a word popping up all over lately, and one that I've become oddly attached to. A surprisingly disturbing episode of FullMetal Alchemist started it, though chimera in their traditional mythological form (lion's head, serpent's tail, etc.) pop up in Age of Mythology (which I confess to playing regularly). But the two definitions of chimera that I keep returning to are these in particular:
  1. any mythical animal with parts taken from various animals
  2. a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve

Dowd nails the "chimera of equality"... but after reading the article I have come to the conclusion that I myself am a chimera of sorts, made up of pieces of identity that are often contradictory and seemingly taken from totally different female types (jaysus, didn't I say at some point that this wasn't going to be a blog full of egocentric ramblings? sheesh!). I mean, I guess we all are. But people often tell me they find me baffling and hard to categorize (not to mention hard to shop for, which makes birthdays and gift-giving hols kind of an adventure). I could wax on about myself for a while, but I think the point is more that if you are a chimera (as is, arguably, every truly modern girl), you are screwed.

I'm sitting here after reading this article feeling as though the empty chasm of my thirties is yawning mockingly before me. Thanks, Maureen. You have chilled me to the bone. But looking back on a recent social situation that absurdly resembled a date (even though it technically wasn't), I'm realizing that I am completely unequipped to be a dating contender... and that I'm both ok with and kind of upset by that. Unfortunately, I think everyone (even Dowd, on some level) would like you to believe that there is a science to it (50s cheesecake like "How to Catch and Hold a Man" has evolved into crap like "The Rules" and Cosmo, etc.), and, my brain being the way it is, I am tempted to research and problem-solve my way into developing an arsenal of dating behavior. But that is ridiculous, and thankfully I know that. But apparently just being yourself is not enough to get you through the jungle. So again, it all boils down to... we are all chimerically screwed. Oh well.

2 Comments:

ken said...

I enjoyed Dowd's article though i thought it tended to play both sides of the fence. It was like a call to inaction- "This sucks. Has sucked. Will likely continue to suck."
Check out drudgereport for offensive captions about Ms. Dowd. If you want another reason to be angry about the horrors of conservate 'journalism'

6:32 PM  
kate said...

Thanks Ken (aw, I think you're my lone reader... congrats). You summed it up—call to inaction is right. "MoDo", as drudgereport calls her, has never been on my radar until now but apparently there are plenty of opinions about her out there. Meanwhile, the New York Times magazine had this to say about her (among many other things): "In her book, Dowd has it both ways: She objects to the way men reduce women to chickish stereotypes, but then she can’t help but engage in a little bit of it herself." Sigh.

6:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home