Two authors sit down for dinner.
The two authors, Pat Archbold and Susan Douglas, have both written articles on
the portrayal of women in society. The article pat wrote was stating that women
have evolved from being pretty to being hot. Pretty being defined as beautiful
and innocent, and hot being simply attractive to the eyes. Susan also talks
about the evolution of women as seen in society. Her article is more about the
media going from portraying women as beach bimbos and at home mothers to CEO’s,
doctors, and even presidents. Although this has changed women are shown as all
levels of the power spectrum, from the powerful CEO to the drunken spring break
temporary nudists you would see late nights on Girls Gone Wild infomercials.
All of this being said she feels that the media does not do an outstanding job
of empowering women.
Pat sits there having read all
twenty two pages of Susan’s article. Susan stares across at Pat having read his
article. The two authors have a very inquisitive look on their faces. Pat
utters a syllable as Susan mumbles a word. They stop, laugh, and then take sips
of their wine. Pat tells Susan that she looks very pretty. Susan smiles and
says thank you. The two then start to discuss the portrayal of women in
society. Both acknowledge the others work and ideas. Susan talks most of the
time.
Susan speaks about women being
portrayed in society as hot seductive duchess of power. “The change from
housewife to snappy powerful leaders in their fields is mildly appreciated yet
still a huge mistake as women are not really dealing with this in the modern
day”, states Douglas. Pat nods as he takes a sip of his drink, going over the
statement as he thinks of what to retort. With a slight smirk he expresses, “This
is very true and quite disturbing. Women have stopped being portrayed as warm
and innocent, and are now being shown as hot empty vessels of lust. What
happened to the innocence that men like me love to hold, protect, and cherish.”
Upon hearing this Susan’s expression turns from one of open attention to an
intense and feminist fueled anger followed by disappointment. Her feminist
background completely disagrees with the idea that women should be a certain
way to entice men to protect them or even need a man to protect them. The two authors then argue over the role of
women in society and a man’s role in a relationship. The argument leads to both
authors having a since of ill-will towards the other as both realize the scene
in which they are causing. Calming down they decide to agree to disagree
shortly leading to the end of dinner.
Xzander, your post was definitely entertaining to read. Thank you for that. Why did you think that Susan would be the one man-handling the conversation? Is it just because her article was considerably longer than Pat's? Also, why do you think Susan's reaction to Pat's comment about protecting females would be that of intense anger? All feminists aren't angry, ya know? I sort of imagine an articulate adult like Susan would be able to have a debate without letting emotions get involved, but in the dinner you described they are drinking.. so! You also thought that they would argue over a woman's role in society, but I don't really think Pat's article spoke about what a women's role is in society. I think he primarily spoke about what he likes to see in a woman. I was frustrated by the fact that Pat did not care to speak about what women DO, instead his article was about what women APPEAR as. Also, instead of considering women as individuals, he gladly summed the entire gender into a shallow bunch who only wants to be hot for the sake of male attention. Ironically, his article seemed to be written with the purpose of persuading women to strive for his attention. Did you catch that irony? Anyways, your post was very imaginative and entertaining!
ReplyDeleteXzander, while I do agree that the chat over dinner would go rather effortlessly and that Susan would most likely hold most of the conversation, I disagree with the statement that Pat’s main point of the article was to describe a woman’s role in society. I believe he was merely describing the good qualities he saw in the later generations and was simply trying to put the blame of women’s actions on the media. He does this by highlighting the need to idolize the way celebrities live their life and then try to copy that lifestyle. On the opposing side of Pat’s media argument, Douglas underlines the unequal treatment of women in today’s society by mentioning that women only make ¾ of a man’s salary when holding the same position. Men are, undoubtedly, getting paid more and this should not go unnoticed. Aside from their differences, I do believe they would agree on the fact that women need to strive to be more than someone’s arm candy. But this problem starts from a very young age, and that is where the corrections would need to start. Children need to know that men do not hold all of the power and that women have just as much right to equal pay as they do. The problem is that it would take a lot of convincing to get men to think the same way, and at this point I believe Pat and Douglas would end their night and decide to agree to disagree.
ReplyDeleteThat was a very well thought out conversation that the two authors would have if they were having dinner. I would completely agree with the direction that the conversation takes. At first, of course, the two authors would take a couple of minutes to get acquainted with each other and get a feel of what the dinner is going to feel like. Douglas seems to be the more assertive author. She pounds the call to action into the reader with her constant attacks on how the media portrays women while Archbold asks women to stop being what men want them to be. That is what I would love to add. The fact that Douglas is the more aggressive writer sets this fun night for disaster. Secondly, Archbold seems to be more concerned about women’s loss of innocence. Although this is true, that women do lose their sense of the word pretty and abandon that image for the image of “hot”, it seems that she is ultimately more concerned about inner and outer beauty. Douglas, however, wants women to forget about words like “pretty” and “hot” and begin to look more into words like powerful and intellectual. She makes it clear to the reader that she hates the way women are portrayed in the media, especially TV shows on MTV. Needless to say, both authors have almost completely points of view and their approach to the situation is completely different. Their conversation would probably turn away from fun by the end of the night.
ReplyDeleteXzander Fleming, I love what you did with this dinner situation! It was clear and concise, and I felt that you captured both authors’ personalities very well. Susan would be the one to make the first bold move (by speaking first), and she would definitely argue upon hearing that women need to go back to fitting a certain stereotype. Pat on the other hand, does seem to have the more shy and quiet type of personality based on his article "The Death of Pretty". The only difference I could foresee had this situation been real, is that although Pat does hint that he wants women to go back to striving to look innocent so that men can "protect" and "cherish" their innocence, I believe that he would be more careful about saying such a statement to a women, let alone a feminist as Susan Douglas. I believe that Pat has much respect for women, and believes in fighting for their rights, therefore, I believe that he would act with greater chivalry or atleast say something along the lines of “with all due respect” before a bold statement like "This is very true and quite disturbing. Women have stopped being portrayed as warm and innocent, and are now being shown as hot empty vessels of lust. What happened to the innocence that men like me love to hold, protect, and cherish.” However, had Pat made uttered such a statement as, yes, Susan would respond dead on to making a scene, agreeing to disagree, and leaving.
ReplyDeleteXzander I liked how the flow of the dinner situation went. I agree with you and the outcome of the dinner. Susan seems like the one who would take control of the situation as well as get more upset over something Pat said. Pat seems a lot more laid back and just states obvious points, then once he does Susan is angry and disappointed. Long story short I don't think the too of them would end up agreeing at the end of the night but it would be a very interesting conversation to listen to.
ReplyDeleteXzander I do agree with your point of view as you state that pat would do most of the talking because I feel she is more strong minded about what she believes women should be and what they shouldn't be so it only makes sense that she would persist on trying to get her point across to Susan and would become angry if she didn't. But at the end I do agree with your statement saying that at the end of the dinner they would not be the best of friends since the two have completely different views on what is better for women, being innocent, scared pretty woman or being the strong in charge independent self-made woman. There is no way to compromise between those two points and so like you said by the end of the dinner the two women would just agree to disagree with each other.
ReplyDeleteThis essay stood out the most, because it was an actual conversation between the two, which is awesome. Considering the the two people at the table, I think the conversation would have gone exactly the same way.Susan definitely would have been more knowledgeable on the subject of 'hotness vs. prettiness' because she wrote so much more compared to Pat.Pat seemed like the type of person who was bothered by this issue, but Susan seemed devoted to it. Susan was clearly an adamant feminist in contrast to Pat. I agree that Susan definitely would've got more angry about it, but she probably would've won the debate instead of agreeing to disagree. Ultimately, I think Pat had the right idea in saying that prettiness wins over hotness. Hotness is a shallow attraction, while prettiness makes you unique. Personally, I think a happy medium of hotness and prettiness should be met to make everyone happy. but as long as fashion magazines have photoshop and girls have makeup tips on the internet, prettiness will slowly fade away.
ReplyDelete