I was getting a tire replaced today, and there was a Whirled from Friday in the waiting area, which was fine -- since I don't read the Whirled I hadn't seen it yet.
At the bottom of the front page of the Satellite section is a sharply-written column protesting the treatment of men on cable channels like Lifetime that target a female audience. The writer is Tulsa School of Arts and Sciences sophomore Hannah Hartney. (TSAS is a charter school.)
Fifteen-year-old Hannah has the genre nailed:
The channels have taglines such as “Television for Women,” which suggests an empowering, positive message for the ladies. Yet whenever I flip past that channel, I see women being “empowered” by being clocked over the head with a telephone, dragged around by her hair and being forced to listen “Television for Masochists” might be a more apt designation. Or perhaps, “Television for Femi-Nazis Who Fly into a Vicious Rage at the Slightest Whiff of Testosterone,” since Public Enemy No. 1 in the majority of these movies is the male half of the population.According to this Menstrual Militia, if a woman is in any sort of relationship whatsoever with a red-blooded straight male, he will either:
A. Abuse her / her children
B. Kidnap her / her children
C. Squeeze the toothpaste from the top end of the tube instead of the bottom
D. Try to get her money . . .. . . ergo proving that men are ruthless devils and should be shot on sight — but not until the end of the movie, of course, when he’s
holding your children hostage and the bad ’80s rock soundtrack is at its peak.
(If I were adhering to DNF*, I'd have a pithy closing observation, but I don't and so I can't.)
