HOPE ABANDONED

Maureen Dowd puzzles over an unintended outcome:

In an email sent to the Herald yesterday, she said she had written the book “in a fun, breezy way, hoping to start cool, sexy conversations between men and women, not spur angry rants from women.”

Next from Modo, the NYTs Lucille Ball: an attempt to bake a pumpkin pie results in the flooding of three New Mexico towns.

Posted by Tim B. on 11/19/2005 at 12:59 PM
    1. Does a conversation with MoDo count?

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 11 19 at 02:56 PM • permalink

 

    1. Angry rants from women is par for the course for everybody.

      Posted by rhhardin on 2005 11 19 at 03:17 PM • permalink

 

    1. Tsk, rhhardin.  I hardly ever rant at my husband more than twice a day.

      Maureen Dowd is simply demonstrating her absolute cluelessness about humanity in general.  We used to call such people “stupid”, but nowadays I’m sure psychology could come up with a perfectly reasonable excuse—- and I emphasize “excuse”—- for her.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2005 11 19 at 03:26 PM • permalink

 

    1. There’s no excuse for MoDo, nor for that matter, for Pinch.

      Posted by Michael Lonie on 2005 11 19 at 03:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. VegameataModomin!

      Posted by Dave S. on 2005 11 19 at 03:33 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Cool, sexy conversations”?

      Grow up, you silly bint. And get the hell out of Manhattan once in a while. Lfe isn’t “Sex & the City.” Thank God.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2005 11 19 at 03:35 PM • permalink

 

    1. That show made me not want to have sex with Kim Catrall.  I didn’t think you could do that.

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 11 19 at 03:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. That’s why I never watched it, Richard.  Keeping hope alive.

      Posted by Sortelli on 2005 11 19 at 04:39 PM • permalink

 

    1. Furthermore, if MoDo wants cool, sexy conversations I would be happy to forward all of my spam to her.

      Posted by Sortelli on 2005 11 19 at 04:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. Notice the kowtowing to MoDo’s “femininity.”

      Evan Thomas…told the Herald that the fact that Dowd is a woman has been critical to her success: “Maureen can sit at a press conference with 30 male reporters and see – and feel – things that all the rest miss. Important things that tell you something about human nature, about the way people really are. This naturally makes the rest of us male reporters jealous.”

      Yup, that old feminine ESP thing.  It’s okay to talk about gender as long as you admit we are soooo superior!

      Posted by Patricia on 2005 11 19 at 04:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. I have to say the American feminist movement is made up of some deadset lacking in humour types.

      Personally, I welcome the input of a bit of laughter into what is often a dead boring debate.

      However, Maureen Dowd is hardly the first to do that.

      Mind you, feminists in Oz can be a pretty dour bunch. At a gabfest in Brisvegas last year, some young thing suggested to me you couldn’t be a feminist and be funny. It diminishes the seriousness of the cause, apparently.

      I asked her if she had heard the joke about the lesbian separatist and the Irishman who both walked into a bar.

      Meanwhile, Australia’s Sheila Jeffreys, who reckons having a bloke crack a fat anywhere in your vicinity is pretty much akin to rape, is hardly a barrel of giggles.

      Posted by Major Anya on 2005 11 19 at 04:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. “Sex & The City?” I can sum up that show in three words:

      Self-inflicted problems

      If that show is an accurate representation of what dating in New York is like, no wonder the birthrate among white urban singles in the U.S. is beneath replacement.

      Posted by Tom Ault on 2005 11 19 at 05:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. The lesbian separatist and the Irishman? I haven’t caught up with that one yet, Darlene. Let’s hear it.

      Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2005 11 19 at 05:30 PM • permalink

 

    1. #10: So, according to Evan Thomas, MoDo can sit in a room crowded with men and just start “feeling things”, eh? Must lead to an occasional yelp of surprise, I’d think (“My, what cold hands you’ve got, Grandma!”).

      Posted by paco on 2005 11 19 at 05:48 PM • permalink

 

    1. lol Paco – I just find that remark condescending.

      Why does it have to be about her being about ‘feminine intuition’? Whatever happened to powers of observation and being able to string words together in a way that people want to read?

      I am so over these women who trade on being a woman then complain about any perceived discrimination.

      ‘Oh no, poor little me, I can’t get laid at a drunken frat party. Must be because I’m an attractive, powerful woman!’

      Yeah, sure thing, babe. Might be more likely that you are a hard-assed cow and it shows. As they say, beauty is skindeep and ugly is to the bone.

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 11 19 at 06:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. the place of powerful women in a political culture where all the president’s men are just that – male.

      Condoleezza Rice is a dude?

      Posted by jic on 2005 11 19 at 06:32 PM • permalink

 

    1. Dowd said ““I was… getting shot at.”

      Posted by Some0Seppo on 2005 11 19 at 06:56 PM • permalink

 

    1. Holy cats! Her editor had a chance to accept her resignation a mere six months after she began writing her column? And the fool declined to accept it, leaving a helpless public exposed to her tedious snarkiness for all these years? Talk about aiding and abetting a felony! And I love the bit about how she feels “at ease” with foreign policy: apparently it’s just another topic like wrinkle cream and dating, a subject in which one acquires expertise by, well, by reading the NYT, of course. As someone once said, opinions are like butts: everybody’s got one. Why hers (opinions, that is) should be of particular interest to anyone besides her therapist is baffling.

      Posted by paco on 2005 11 19 at 07:19 PM • permalink

 

    1. Women like Dowd annoy me greatly.

      Apart from a desperate lack of humour, the one thing that annoys me about ‘feminists’ is their lack of respect for men.

      Until Dowd gets her over-quoiffed head around that she will forever remain desperate and dateless.

      These women need to respect the fundamental differences in how men and women think.

      By respecting the different attributes we bring to a common goal, for instance a happy and prosperous married life, both people’s lives are enriched far beyond what each could do as individuals.

      Men and women are two halves of a whole not rivals. And the sooner women like Dowd paid men the respect they deserve the better.

      As a woman I refuse to celebrate international women’s day until there is an international men’s day.

      There’s no need to get angry at Maureen (yes, I know I just did); it would be far more productive just to laugh at her.

      —Nora

      Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 11 19 at 07:20 PM • permalink

 

    1. Angry rants?  Me?

      Posted by Achillea on 2005 11 19 at 07:22 PM • permalink

 

    1. Q. How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

      A. That’s not funny.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2005 11 19 at 08:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. OK, but flooding in New Mexico?  Tim, it’s pretty dry there.  Try flooding your outback instead.

      Posted by Mitch on 2005 11 19 at 08:41 PM • permalink

 

    1. I just loved how she summoned her research assistant to help her out in a bar argument.

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2005 11 19 at 08:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. Dowd: “…strong, successful women… feel proud… to vivisect me… [I] ask for… more?”

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2005 11 19 at 08:54 PM • permalink

 

    1. Her hair and skin were a mess, and she says she curled up crying on her bedroom floor for months. She consulted an acupuncturist and nutritionist, and kept writing.

      Holy shit, these cows expect to be taken seriously!

      “Has that columnist filed yet, Chuck?”
      “Na chief, she’s still blubbering under her bed.”
      “Aw, poor kid, have her monthly cheque for $25,000 sent out to her. That might cheer her up.”

      As frickin’ if!!!

      These bints belong at Mills and Boon, certainly not in newspapers.

      Posted by slatts on 2005 11 19 at 08:58 PM • permalink

 

    1. Hey, Mitch, clear out your mailbox: I’m getting all these replies bounced to my inbox:

      A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
      recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

      mitch@chicagoboyz.net
      mailbox is full: retry timeout exceeded

      Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 11 19 at 09:01 PM • permalink

 

    1. OK, but flooding in New Mexico?  Tim, it’s pretty dry there.  Try flooding your outback instead.

      She could just destroy one of New Mexico’s many fine dams.

      Posted by jic on 2005 11 19 at 09:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. They say power is the ultimate aphrodisiac, but MoDo only seems to go for make-believe power: is that why she fucked Michael Douglas (make-believe President) and Aaron Sorkin (writes a show about a make-believe President)?

      Has she ever had the hots for Harrison FordMorgan FreemanBill PullmanJames Cromwell, or even Billy Bob Thornton? Or does she go for older guys like Henry Fonda?

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2005 11 19 at 10:45 PM • permalink

 

    1. Better yet, did Clinton she ever give Modo any “off-the record private briefings”?

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2005 11 19 at 10:46 PM • permalink

 

    1. Aaaarrgggh . . . delete the word “she” in the previous post – must preview!

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2005 11 19 at 10:47 PM • permalink

 

    1. Just googled the following phrase: “maureen dowd had sex with ted kennedy”. 82,100 results!

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2005 11 19 at 10:49 PM • permalink

 

    1. “canny” reportage?

      Posted by crash on 2005 11 19 at 11:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. I sure know that when I was back on the market there was nothing that more drew me to a woman than a bad attitde, angry feminism, a grudge in general against me and a belief that she was owed something.  Really made me want to begin a relationship.

      I wonder why women like MoDo think I would want to put up from them treatment that would make me punch my best male friend in the mouth.

      That whiny, pissy complaining is really, really unattractive.  Can you imagine being around her on a daily basis?  I’m beginning to feel sorry for the men she works with.  (Well, maybe not Sulzberger.  He deserves a fate even worse than that, but it’ll have to do for now.)

      Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2005 11 19 at 11:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. Oops. PIMF.  that should read “… a grudge in general against men . . .”

      Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2005 11 19 at 11:28 PM • permalink

 

    1. When a guy can’t get any, it’s “What’s wrong with me?” Followed by a job/car/body inventory.

      When a woman can’t get any, it’s “What’s wrong with men?” Followed by ‘tude escalation which makes her even more unattractive than she obviously already is.

      (And yes, ladies, there are plenty of exceptions to both.)

      Here’s the deal, Modo – Michael Douglas dumped you and married Catherine Zeta-Jones because Catherine Zeta-Jones is younger, prettier, and more charming than you. That’s it. End of story. Deal.

      Posted by Dave S. on 2005 11 19 at 11:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. I saw MoDo on cable TV today, prolly first time I’ve seen a video of her.

      No wonder she can’t get a date. She looks 30 years older than she does in her portrait photos (no surprise), and her lines are in a permanent frown, such that she permanently looks like she just bit down into a sour lemon.

      Uggh!

      Then I channel-surfed and found an 18-year-old blonde in a bikini top, and fell to pleasuring myself.

      Posted by Supercat on 2005 11 19 at 11:50 PM • permalink

 

    1. No wonder she can’t get a date. She looks 30 years older than she does in her portrait photos (no surprise), and her lines are in a permanent frown, such that she permanently looks like she just bit down into a sour lemon.

      Uggh!

      Then I channel-surfed and found an 18-year-old blonde in a bikini top, and fell to pleasuring myself.

      See, now that’s my point exactly!

      Posted by Dave S. on 2005 11 19 at 11:52 PM • permalink

 

    1. #33:

      That whiny, pissy complaining is really, really unattractive.  Can you imagine being around her on a daily basis?

      Unfortunately, I don’t have to imagine it. But I’ll tell you the inevitable result: divorce, and not amicable.

      Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2005 11 19 at 11:59 PM • permalink

 

    1. #31: Hey, O&I, if you slice and dice a little by adding “under water”, you still get over 52,000 hits.

      Posted by paco on 2005 11 20 at 12:01 AM • permalink

 

    1. #19 – Thank you, Nora. Well said.

      Posted by walterplinge on 2005 11 20 at 01:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. Evan Thomas, assistant managing editor of Newsweek, told the Herald that the fact that Dowd is a woman has been critical to her success: “Maureen can sit at a press conference with 30 male reporters and see – and feel – things that all the rest miss. Important things that tell you something about human nature, about the way people really are. This naturally makes the rest of us male reporters jealous.”

      Men ‘miss’ the ‘important things’…

      and women might not miss the fact that self-castration is not becoming, particularly as a come-on.

      Posted by Inurbanus on 2005 11 20 at 03:45 AM • permalink

 

    1. Nilknarf makes a good point.

      Good point, Nilknarf.

      There are plenty of women who are willing to slut it up to get ahead and then whinge when things don’t go their way.

      Feminism equals equal rights and equal responsibilities.

      Posted by Major Anya on 2005 11 20 at 04:21 AM • permalink

 

    1. #31- I googled “bill clinton had sex with mother teresa” and got 319,000!

      Posted by slammer on 2005 11 20 at 05:12 AM • permalink

 

    1. From the SMH article, Dowd says that, “men tell her that what they really want is not a powerful woman, but a ‘virgin in a gingham dress’”.

      OK men, is that true?  Is that what men want?  Because I was under the distinct impression that what men really want is a woman who is powerful enough to stick up for herself (and to stick up for her man), who doesn’t screw around and who, at appropriate moments, can be persuaded by him to take off her dress, gingham or otherwise, with enthusiasm.

      Later on she says that it’s, “strong, successful women who are bristling,” but I wonder what she means by success.  Years ago, when I was young and brainwashed, I thought successful women were those who achieved success like men do but I found I couldn’t do it because I was too interested in being a wife to my husband and a mother to my children.  Those are not jobs for sissies.  Now, after nearly 23 years of marriage, I don’t have the big time career but I do have a husband who’s still interested in me as well as several children who are ordinarily well adjusted and well on the road to becoming responsible adults. So I figure I’ve been strong and successful at doing what women were made to do and I refuse to regard that as trivial compared to, say, having a job as a columnist at the NYT.  Poor old Dowd can have her miserable, lonely, big-shot, career life.

      Posted by Janice on 2005 11 20 at 05:28 AM • permalink

 

    1. Well, gee, I can’t tell you how many cool, sexy conversations I’ve had with women since MoDo’s book came out – (thinks): Thanks Modo!!

      Posted by cuckoo on 2005 11 20 at 05:38 AM • permalink

 

    1. Janice, that made more honest sense than a hundred “bristling” MoDo columns.

      It seems that even Howdy Dowdy is beginning to confront the fact that ‘Sexless in the City’ posturing just might not cut it in the rewarding life dept. As it stands she’s not much more than a childless, well-paid shrew beloved by battery salesmen alone.

      Posted by monkeyfan on 2005 11 20 at 08:20 AM • permalink

 

    1. Janice,

      That pretty much says it for me.

      I think most men, when looking for a wife, want the ying to their yang, the part that will make their life whole.  We’re not looking for a roommate that is focused on their career and only on their own needs.  What’s the point?

      Show me a marriage that has last a lifetime (such as my parents’) and I will show you a wife that is generous and gives much to her husband and children.  I think most men know that is not MoDo.

      (BTW, sexy high heals and dark stockings don’t hurt either, va va va voom).

      Posted by wronwright on 2005 11 20 at 09:55 AM • permalink

 

    1. Geez, I dunno, peeps. I don’t think that I’ve ever been as excited as when I see a woman in real tight gingham. I admit to a textile fetish, and I place gingham at the top of the list right above latex.

      Ohh, I’m waxing gibbous just thinking about it.

      Posted by ekw on 2005 11 20 at 11:32 AM • permalink

 

    1. From the SMH article, Dowd says that, “men tell her that what they really want is not a powerful woman, but a ‘virgin in a gingham dress’”.

      Yay, it’s the ageless battle… Ginger or Mary Ann? (OK, if you’re Ashton Kutcher, Mrs. Howell…)

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 11 20 at 11:36 AM • permalink

 

    1. What’s that stain on Modo’s blue dress?  Mayonnaise?

      Posted by Mystery Meat on 2005 11 20 at 11:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. #49, Richard,

      Why not all three of them?  Not at the same time, of course.  That’s what Franklin planners are for, isn’t it?

      Marrying is one thing, pushing whiskers is something completely different.  Experiencing a variety of textile fabrics can be a good thing.

      Posted by wronwright on 2005 11 20 at 11:56 AM • permalink

 

    1. I’ve been married 27 years, and while I can’t speak for all men (I’ll leave the “group spokesman” delusions to MoDo and her ilk), I’m not entirely unrepresentative. I was attracted to my wife because she was very pretty, very intelligent, and had a good sense of humor. She’s also thoroughly honest, self-taught in practically every field of home repair, and completely dedicated to the proposition that devoting the bulk of her time and effort to converting our little savages into useful citizens and Catholic gentlemen is an honorable vocation that trumps a “career”, as this term is usually defined. I think where certain women went wrong was in learning to worship what Willam James once referred to as “the bitch goddess, success”. I don’t have much patience with women OR men who think that life’s all about power or money or notoriety.

      Posted by paco on 2005 11 20 at 12:12 PM • permalink

 

    1. Generally speaking, men know a good thing when they have it.  If they have a wife, a good wife, who is selfless and will sacrifice for her husband and children, they will give much of themselves to keep that good wife.

      I wouldn’t give a sack of magical beans for a woman like MoDo.  I don’t care how famous, successful, and wealthy she is.

      And you can tell her that wronwright said that.  Might as well upset her now than later.

      Posted by wronwright on 2005 11 20 at 12:24 PM • permalink

 

    1. I agree, MoDo is not wife material and the ‘free market’ has indicated with all its ruthless sincerity that this is so.

      The fact she is a Michael Douglas cast off is a dealbreaker in itself. Who knows where he’s been.

      Maybe that ex-husband of Liza Minelli might be interested. Someone should put them in touch.

      One observation: how much Julia Baird is becoming like her. The Australian face of twittering feminism, who despite having been at Harvard and the daughter of a very capable and decent MP, seems to be going backwards in the mindless drivel she puts out.

      Remember her recent article when comparing the hypocrisy between the treatment of David Cameron and drugs (he admitted nothing, when asked about events about 20 years ago) and Kate Moss (who freely admitted to having the problem right now). Poor Julia thought there was absolutely no difference between the 2 stories, so thought their different treatment was hypocrisy. Mmm, have a think Julia…

      Also, get the pompous way she refers to herself as ‘the Herald’ when seeing MoDo in a bar. “Le Herald – c’est moi.”

      Posted by Flying Giraffe on 2005 11 20 at 01:07 PM • permalink

 

    1. I just have two words to say to Maureen Dowd.

      Erma Bombeck.

      Posted by Mike G on 2005 11 20 at 01:13 PM • permalink

 

    1. Janice: certainly many men dig a “strong” or “powerful” woman, expecially if she’s hot.

      One caveat though: Nothing’s more annoying that a woman who is constantly actually describing herself as “strong”. Who’s she trying to convince? Why does she keep having to hear her own voice say that?

      I don’t think you’d ever hear a man telling people that he was “strong man”—actually men don’t use that language at all unless talking about their bench press, do they?

      But a woman who talks like that clearly has some problem, and MoDo is a perfect example.

      Posted by Supercat on 2005 11 20 at 03:00 PM • permalink

 

    1. Is it too late to observe that this thread is mistitled?

      MoDo is not going to reproduce.  Hope is revived.

      Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 11 20 at 03:11 PM • permalink

 

    1. Supe

      That’s true. When people have to pump themselves up by telling other people what their great qualities are, it is quite suspect. Usually, the more someone tries to convince me that they are strong, or “too honest for their own good,” or intelligent, etc., it means that these are the qualities they lack most. When someone is truly strong, honest, kind, etc., they don’t need to tell anyone about it. It’s apparent by the way they act and by the way they carry themselves.

      Women like Dowd are like spoiled little girls bouncing up and down on their beds and screeching at the top of their lungs, “Look at me, look at me, see how wonderful I am? Don’t you love me? Please, LOVE ME!!!” It’s not strength and intelligence that scare men off, it’s her bathetic, bottomless neediness.

      Posted by ekw on 2005 11 20 at 03:25 PM • permalink

 

    1. Well, it looks like my post was eaten by the ethermonster again.

      Bummer about that; I was just agreeing with everyone else here.

      I just didn’t include the bit about me wearing latex for ekw.

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 11 21 at 06:47 AM • permalink

 

    1. p(ms)imf….

      Posted by crash on 2005 11 21 at 09:45 AM • permalink

 

    1. OMigod, latex and gingham. The way to a man’s heart is through his textile fetish.

      I wonder if Dowd is checking in here to get some pointers on landing that big lug she’s pining for.

      Posted by ekw on 2005 11 21 at 04:03 PM • permalink

 

    1. ekw, I don’t do gingham. I do, however, do flannel. And I have been known to wear an apron. When cooking. With clothing underneath.

      Just no gingham. I’m not even sure what it looks like!

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 11 21 at 06:40 PM • permalink

 

    1. OK. I don’t reeeeally need the gingham. I don’t actually know what it is myself. I don’t know exactly what chintz is, either. Mystery fabrics.

      Posted by ekw on 2005 11 21 at 07:08 PM • permalink

 

    1. From the SMH article, Dowd says that, “men tell her that what they really want is not a powerful woman, but a ‘virgin in a gingham dress’”.

      OK men, is that true?  Is that what men want?

      Yes, emphatically, yes it really is.  Or at least some variation of such, involving fabric, or not; involving the virgin illusion, or not.  These things are not literal, but perceived and actively created (eg, particularly useful for phone sex, when the man of the house is traveling, or just bored in his office).  Basically, it all comes down to the male mating drive and the ‘innocent’ female succumbing to his overwhelming…eerr…charms.

      Posted by Ck on 2005 11 22 at 04:24 AM • permalink

 

    1. 44 Janice

      From the SMH article, Dowd says that, “men tell her that what they really want is not a powerful woman, but a ‘virgin in a gingham dress’”.
      OK men, is that true?

      It depends.  How does she look?

      Is that what men want?  Because I was under the distinct impression that what men really want is a woman who is powerful enough to stick up for herself (and to stick up for her man), who doesn’t screw around and who, at appropriate moments, can be persuaded by him to take off her dress, gingham or otherwise, with enthusiasm.

      Well, that last part, that’s a factor.  But seriously, how does she look?

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2005 11 22 at 10:51 AM • permalink

 

    1. Janice

      SDD is giving it to you straight. She can strong and powerful herself to the Queenship, but does she have a nice ass? That’s really the entire deal here. Nice ass and legs, that is my personal preference. I mean, strong, powerful w/nice ass, etc. Gingham-clad is fine.

      Ck, my home phone # is 01-707-589-8…oops. I don’t want wronwright calling me and doing a falsetto voice. Ditto Olrence, mcenroe and crash and the rest of you filthy-minded Aussies and Yanks. No…Aussies. You’re definitely the worst. And, Olrence, didn’t you read where it said, “Australians Please Sign Twice (Don’t make me come down there)?” Please adhere to the rules of the House.

      Posted by ekw on 2005 11 22 at 03:55 PM • permalink

 

    1. SDD is giving it to you straight.

      In my dreams, I am!  I mean … I haven’t even MET Janice!

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2005 11 22 at 04:11 PM • permalink

 

    1. Strong is one thing.  Angry and mean is something else entirely.

      Posted by MikeTheLibrarian on 2005 11 22 at 04:12 PM • permalink

 

  1. #11 “Meanwhile, Australia’s Sheila Jeffreys, who reckons having a bloke crack a fat anywhere in your vicinity is pretty much akin to rape …”

    hmmm problem is, no one would know if she cracked a wide-on in someone’s vicinity …

    Posted by egg_ on 2005 11 23 at 07:54 PM • permalink