“Would anyone have read anything Marie Calloway wrote, would she have secured this level of sad “microfame,” if this weren’t set up as the very easiest and most direct way for women to get this level of attention? Re: reward v. punishment: the only worse sin than writing about sex is not writing about sex. This is a problem that predates her, that predates all young women who write about sex, that predates all young women who write, that predates all young women. It’s a horrible systemic problem and let’s unleash our rage upon it. Let’s say that it’s fucking terrible that the desire for attention, for women, is inevitably socially coded as a desire for sexual attention. It hurts women who engage and participate in becoming objects — and it also really hurts women who don’t. Be horrified by her choices — they are bad choices. But also be horrified that it often looks like the only choice.”
I think this makes so much sense. As a person who makes image macro jokes about Lana Del Rey and Marie Callender, I know it’s hard to discern between something that’s making fun of the subject versus something that’s making fun of the form of expression versus something that’s making fun of the story about it. I know that I am usually making fun of the latter, the story about it. That said, even with the best of intentions, it’s almost impossible to make fun of a news story without making fun of its subject, which is a kind of interesting thing to think about.
