The Semi-Feminism Of "Liz Lemonism"

No–this is really good, with even mass-appeal for close tabbers like you. Hold your trigger finger and give it another go.

Yes, it slows down in the middle but picks up again at the 2/3rds point!

I'm not sure I really agree. It seems like most of her points could be answered with a rhetorical "You understand this is a comedy, right?"

It just seems like the usual half-wit, postgrad, half-assed theory spoutin', self obsessor reading too much into an NBC sitcom

Actually that's too harsh. She's not a half-wit.

@saythatscool They could also be answered with "I know you are but what am I" or "I'm rubber you're glue" or "my cat's breath smells like cat food" but that doesn't indicate the points aren't valid, just that the responder isn't willing to engage in the discussion. Television is a caricature of human behavior but it doesn't sprout fully formed from some kind of vacuum.

If you're not into it, that's fine, but as irritated as I sometimes get by Tiger Beatdown, I admire the author's rigor.

Yes but still. Liz Lemon's not a real person. She's written by writers who are doing all the things writers do to stay employed. The author spends all that mental energy responding to somebody that somebody else made up. Non-valid from the get-go.

You could be right. My cat's breath definitely smells like cat food, now that you mention it.

But you understand that 30 Rock is something that NBC puts on in between the real shows which are beer and tampon vignettes? To wonder aloud for paragraphs about the image that Liz Lemon presents for feminism gives the show an importance that it neither wants nor has ever demanded. The show itself constantly suggests that it's mindless entertainment and there is a constant theme that all television is a silly waste of time.

I would also suggest the only reason that Sadie is taking Liz Lemon so seriously, is that she secretly wants people to perceive her as a real life Liz Lemon. Which is fine, she can sell herself just like the tampons and use 30 Rock at the attention grabber. Just don't suggest that I should take her or a beer commercial seriously.

@Annie K: Exactly.

The problem with this isn't with Liz Lemon inherently, it's that real-life people who weren't made up are prone to framing themselves and those around them in the terms presented on the show. The point here is "Liz Lemon makes for bad framing!" not "Liz Lemon is a bad person!"

With a bit of free-wheeling digression into theoryville, because that's what tends happen when people go to college and/or read Bitch.

Actually, I think Sady used to write for Bitch, so yes, point game set match endorsement deal.

(full disclosure: I like Bitch. New Internet!)

I'm still irritated with this smart/educated person framing herself in terms of a non-real person. Sounds non-smart/educated.

I'll contest that. Smart, educated people do frame themselves in terms of people from literature, television, and cinema. They do it all the time. Most English majors will justify their (fine… our) degree by arguing they often do it without realizing it, that internalization of narrative is a reflex and if we can't fight it, we may as well understand it.

And even if, as you might argue, you don't ever do that, ever, and are a fully realized person whose entire self-understanding is based solely on your empirical existence, who extends the same courtesy to your understanding of others, well… other people are still framing you in terms of external and often fictional characters/narratives. So yes, there's still some value to critiquing made-up people.

Not that you're under any obligation to find it interesting, of course.

@Multiphasic: But there's a difference between framing myself in terms of Raskolnikov and in terms of Fred Flintstone, right?

If I sat down and wrote an article about how pissed I am with the portrayal of the American father through Fred Flintstone, eventually, someone would make the (valid) point that it's a poorly drawn cartoon. And therefore not meant to be taken as a serious depiction of real fathers. (Remember daddy Bush bitching about Bart Simpson during his campaign. People couldn't laugh hard enough at him for that.) Sady has intentionally picked a silly caricature of a woman and is trying to treat it seriously even though most people who I know who watch the show don't take Liz Lemon seriously at all. It's manufactured outrage done for cheap attention, so it's a dumb article.

Which do you think Liz Lemon is more like? Fred or Raski? Be honest.

@saythatscool Pebbles.

@barnhouse: Bam Bam! You hit the nail on the head.

@Multiphasic: Now I'm wondering whether our disagreement is a matter of age. I'm ancient and interested only in whatever reality is going to smack me with a ballbat next. And maybe the author is a bright young English major trying on characters to see which fits best. So back to saythat'scool: I still think she should aim higher than Liz Lemon. But I'll back away from thinking that she's dumb to even try.

OK fair enough. But just so we're clear because I called her a half-wit before and that was wrong. I don't think Sady is dumb. I think she wrote an article with a dumb premise.

[THE REST OF THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE EDITORS BECAUSE IT WAS COMPLETELY, LUDICROUSLY, INSANELY UNACCEPTABLE AND INAPPROPRIATE --CHOIRE.]

@saythatscool
That's fine if you think it's silly or a poorly-written article. We can agree to disagree. But I'm interpreting your efforts as going further than just disagreeing and attempting to shut down this discussion because you don't think it's important.

Fred Flintstone, crudely-drawn as he is, is not trying to "seriously" depict fathers. But he is seriously depicting cultural attitudes and beliefs about fathers, and about men. Pop culture reflects larger beliefs and attitudes, and is far more insidious than we realize as people are wont to dismiss it as humour, or fluff and therefore not important. Imagine if we were only allowed to analyze "serious" (whatever that means) characters.

Is comparing yourself to Liz Lemon any worse than to, say, a real-life celebrity? I could argue that since we have an insight into the character's motivations due to voice-overs, narration etc, we actually know more about the character than we know about people in real life. Her actions are generally consistent with what we expect based on her sex/orientation/socioeconomic status. With the exception of our close friends/SO's, we know very little about other people, only what they choose to reveal. Even the, we generalize and compare them to what we know of other people and characters.

I think the better question is, how many more people, including people who've made it through higher education, are more familiar with Hannah-Barbera than Fyodor Dostoevsky? How often in our fragile lives do we hear dumb motherfuckers who will likely make more money than us (sort of using the royal we, here, but feel free to identify if you like) quoting venal, rapey Austin Powers lines? Even though their lives will undoubtedly end up more closely resembling that of a Cheever character?

I mean, you're essentially arguing that Sady should be above all this. And I'm not sure I disagree; as an easily bored member of the choir, I tend to go read about sports when preached to (delicious heteronormative fun!). But she does pretty clearly state in the editorial her desire to mix it up even on this kind of "shallow" front. And I was pretty entertained by the result.

(I mean, where the fuck is Twofer?)

Err, that's @saythatscool

What? What'd he/she say? I mean, I read it before but now I forgot. Consumed with curiosity!

That up there is @Choire.

Sorry Choire and Sady. Upon further reflection, you are correct, Choire.

It was just the Vicodin and Dickel talking, Annie. Please ignore it.

Yes, what does 'cis' mean? I kept bleeping over it like I would foreign language terms in a translated novel.

Thirded-ed.

I believe it means you identify with the gender you were born with.

@ Tipsy: I think that's right (assuming some accuracy for Wikipedia). "The terms cis and trans are from Latin, in which cis means 'on the same side' and trans means 'on the other side' or 'across.'"

So cisgendered as a opposed to transgendered. I've never been comfortable with the Trans prefix . It implies they are beyond a gendered state, but "multi" or perhaps a new word meaning "between our known classes of gender" would be better.

And let's use another language besides Greek or Latin.

Why not mine Squamish or Hopi? We'll call them Sḵwx̱wú7mesh instead.

I don't know about plus points for the "cisgendered," now that I finally know what it means. We already know she's a woman and she dates guys…isn't referring to herself as "cisgendered" thus kind of obvious and redundant? Or am I missing something?

You could be transgendered and homosexual–

She's stating that she's not trans. How is that implicit by the fact that she identifies as a woman and dates men?

Guess I was missing something. Thanks for the new perspectives.

That right there was the spot that closed the tab.

And that's when I clicked "pay tab"

I pride myself on being a "Laura Linney not in a Robin Williams movie" man.

Based on your remarks about Ms Gyllenhaal's appearance, I take it you're a Megan Fox man?

All kidding aside, I think the decision is between being the "two-choices guy" and the "Fuck this two-choices shit" guy.

I can't help but read that as an awesome bisexuality joke. I'm going to start referring to myself a "fuck this two-choices shit" guy.

Exactly, myfanwy. When they give us two choices, I think, "Do you realize how many women there are out there? And do you realize what's ridiculously sexy (in different ways) about so many of them?"

I'm a man for all seasons, but usually I'm a "whoever wants to spend time with me" guy.

The only feminist blog that I can read with any regularity. Sorry, Jezebel.