![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
slemslempikeI rather enjoy reading the Blind date feature on the Guardian. I like all of Life & Style, mostly - it's such a soothingly stereotypical view of an upper middle class Guardianista life. Last week I was advised to buy a £75 vegan duffel bag. (I didn't.) The Blind date feature is pleasantly voyeuristic, though obviously not really, and I like seeing what sort of things people feel they have to pretend they talk about on these occasions. Will anyone ever criticise anyone else's table manners? I liked this one particularly: Kate and Dom. It actually sounds like a very dull time, but almost all the dates end up without a spark being kindled, (usually either both of them saying they'll meet up as friends, or one being keener than another), and this is the first one I've seen where a woman rated a man more highly and wanted to meet up and he politely declined. I just like her for daring to admit attraction and risk rejection.
The Guardian is less pleasing to me in this article where it is claimed that the new sitcom written by three young men is "quasi-feminist". By which, apparently, they mean that it's about a world when women are uniformly competent and together, and the three remaining men, who are the main characters to the women's background context, get to be incompetent and funny. The writers/actors are from The Inbetweeners (which I do find funny, and even though I expect the film to be dire I still intend to go and see it), so I'm assuming they're attempting to distance themselves from the decidedly non-feminist nature of that show. But UGH. Lumping women in together and assigning them a uniform characteristic is not feminist, even if the characteristic is supposedly positive. And I know there's no official test to take to get to call something feminist, but there SHOULD BE, and I SHOULD GET TO ADMINISTER IT.
There is also an article by Judith Butler in comment is free - I don't understand the background enough to properly engage with it, but it was still very interesting. I am also very amused by the comment thanking her for a clear article - clarity is not usually what she is credited with. I am having to restrain myself from making my first foray into Guardian commenting with "I LOVE YOU JUDITH I WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOU PLEASE LOVE ME BACK AND READ MY THESIS".
I wish I were the sort of person who made good comments on things. However, I appear to be one of life's lurkers, even on things I actually want to engage with. I have been meaning to respond to comments on a suggestion I made on Edinburgh Festival Idea Challenge (about signs for non-wheelchair accesible venues), but I haven't made it yet.(Ooh, I am currently in the top 25 for voted ideas! If the general apathy continues to the end of October I could win festival tickets.) It's a shame about the apathy, it's a good idea, I think, to get ideas about improving the festivals. I encourage people to go and add their own suggestions! (And, of course, if you think my idea has merit, you could vote for it.) I especially like the ideas about recycling bins for flyers on the Royal Mile, having a loyalty card, and the various suggestions for going paperless.
The Guardian is less pleasing to me in this article where it is claimed that the new sitcom written by three young men is "quasi-feminist". By which, apparently, they mean that it's about a world when women are uniformly competent and together, and the three remaining men, who are the main characters to the women's background context, get to be incompetent and funny. The writers/actors are from The Inbetweeners (which I do find funny, and even though I expect the film to be dire I still intend to go and see it), so I'm assuming they're attempting to distance themselves from the decidedly non-feminist nature of that show. But UGH. Lumping women in together and assigning them a uniform characteristic is not feminist, even if the characteristic is supposedly positive. And I know there's no official test to take to get to call something feminist, but there SHOULD BE, and I SHOULD GET TO ADMINISTER IT.
There is also an article by Judith Butler in comment is free - I don't understand the background enough to properly engage with it, but it was still very interesting. I am also very amused by the comment thanking her for a clear article - clarity is not usually what she is credited with. I am having to restrain myself from making my first foray into Guardian commenting with "I LOVE YOU JUDITH I WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOU PLEASE LOVE ME BACK AND READ MY THESIS".
I wish I were the sort of person who made good comments on things. However, I appear to be one of life's lurkers, even on things I actually want to engage with. I have been meaning to respond to comments on a suggestion I made on Edinburgh Festival Idea Challenge (about signs for non-wheelchair accesible venues), but I haven't made it yet.(Ooh, I am currently in the top 25 for voted ideas! If the general apathy continues to the end of October I could win festival tickets.) It's a shame about the apathy, it's a good idea, I think, to get ideas about improving the festivals. I encourage people to go and add their own suggestions! (And, of course, if you think my idea has merit, you could vote for it.) I especially like the ideas about recycling bins for flyers on the Royal Mile, having a loyalty card, and the various suggestions for going paperless.
