Amanda Rountree

To Whom It May Concern:

Ah, the internet…where just anyone can post their thoughts—whether they be mindful or misdirected—and have the whole world bear witness.  I read this article recently.  My first thought was to simply ignore the drivel—it was posted on Fox News, after all.  It’s obviously a sensationalist piece.  After reading it, it was still obviously a sensationalist piece, however, there was a part of me that feared that some might actually take it seriously.  Or worse, that the person writing it actually believed some of what they were writing.  The article is incompetently written, by the by.  Each section’s title is poorly (if at all) backed up by that section’s text.  But I’ll get more into that later.

In an effort to track down the author of said article, I went to askmen.com—apparently the source of this article.  If you don’t know about this website, suffice it to say that in mere clicking distance from one another you can find literary gems such as, “10 Reasons Why You Should Never Get Married” and “Top 10:  More Reasons You’ve Been Single Too Long”  …Not to mention, “How to Date on Facebook” and “How to Approach Women.”  Let me give you men out there a tip for the last two:  Don’t do it with this article.

Speaking of the obtuse article, let’s take a look at it, shall we?  Let’s start by listing the “Five Feminist Demands She Wants You to Ignore”:

I can carry my own bag!

Don’t objectify me!

I’ll pay my share.

I can think for myself!

I won’t be shackled into a marriage.

Oh, boy.  Where does one begin?  Let’s start with “demands” #1 and #3.  And just to be generous, I’ll add a #6:  Don’t open doors for me!  These all go into the same pot, as far as I’m concerned.  The problem with these is that it pigeonholes a man to choose between being either a selfish, impolite asshole or an asshole who opens doors for women only because he thinks they are the weaker sex.  Really?  These are the two choices?  Give me a break.  People are people.  If you’re not carrying any bags and someone is burdened with bags, you offer to help.  This is a no-brainer.  I can’t believe we’re still talking about this in 2012.

#2 is absolutely infuriating.  The thought that there is anyone who would say, “Don’t objectify me” and not mean it, is ludicrous.  Thankfully, because of this poorly written article, it’s clear that the author didn’t know what they were talking about.  Let me be unambiguous, oh anonymous bad writer:  Telling the woman you love that she looks really good in her outfit is not objectifying her.  My last statement is bound to insult everyone’s intelligence but yours, Askmen.com Essayist.  If I needed an actual example of objectification of women, I’m sure I need look no further than your website.

Alright, #4.  Again, simply reading it—juxtaposed with the title of the piece–it is an outrage.  But that’s what one expects from sensationalism.  (I wouldn’t even be typing this right now if I hadn’t been home sick for the last few days, otherwise, I’d have better things to do than to spend more than a minute dealing with this ridiculous article.  However, I’ve already watched a ton of movies online and spent way too much time playing Scrabble on facebook, so here I am.)  This section of the article unsuccessfully attempts to equate being thoughtful, courteous, and attentive to one’s partner with not letting them think for themselves.  What a moronic concept.

Last but not least, we have #5, which again, is a sensationalistic-header with a slight-attempt-to-placate-reality text.  The header boldly proclaims, in one fell swoop that ALL women say they don’t want to be married, when in fact, ALL women secretly want to be married.  It’s like a twelve year-old boy wrote this.  Wait.  That is unfair to twelve year-old boys.  The text beneath it goes on to state—with a slight hat tip to “exceptions to the rule”—that most women want marriage.  Well, here’s a new rule for you:  Women are people.  Men are people.  Some people want marriage.  Some people don’t want marriage.  Some people think they want marriage, but change their minds, and vise versa.

But that’s not all.  This anonymous columnist ends this piece declaring, “…women are a complete contradiction in terms.”  I’m not going to waste the reader’s time pointing out the author’s pronounced misuse of this common idiom.  So I will skip right to addressing what the author is trying to say—that women say one thing but mean something else all the time.  (Insert exasperated sigh here.)  Women are people.  People are different.  Not all women are the same.  Not all men are the same.  You can generalize until your head explodes, but you’re not going to get any closer to a healthy relationship with anyone in your life in doing so.  You also won’t improve your writing ability.

Sincerely,

Amanda Rountree