In a New York Times profile, Broadwell talks about her behind-the-scenes campaign to get media outlets to stop using the word “mistress”, a term that has no similar male counterpart.
“On the one hand, I don’t want to define myself by this” she told the Times. “But on the other hand, I’ve been defined by this. So if I can change things for the better because of it, then why not?”
Mistress has a meaning. The long term female lover of a man married to another. It’s neither a good word not a bad word, it’s just a word with a specific meaning.
“Paula Broadwell, best known for having an affair with David Petraeus that led to the then-CIA director’s resignation, is fighting back against the sexist word that was used so frequently to vilify her.”
If you don’t want to be ‘defined by a word’, maybe try not doing the thing that word means?
Or become famous for something other than shagging around with married men. Jeez. It’s not difficult.
Because she wants the upsides of being his mistress without the downside on the stigma.
But it’s an attitude’s remarkably common. Woman connives in a bloke two-timing his significant other. But she’s claiming victim status, here.
And we do have a male counterpoint word, don’t we? ‘Cept we lump it on guy being two-timed, not the two timer. No brownie points for being a victim, if you’re a bloke.
The definition of a mistress is somewhere between a mister and a mattress.
“In a New York Times profile, Broadwell talks about her behind-the-scenes campaign to get media outlets to stop using the word “mistress”, a term that has no similar male counterpart.”
Cuckold?
Swap “Mistress” for “Mattress”.
Job done.
@BiND
Yep,that’s the word.
Interestingly, Spanish has a word for the bloke responsible for the cuckolding, as well. But much less hesitation in coming to terms with reality in latin culture.
Fancy man?
She is not objecting because “mistress” lacks meaning. She is objecting because the male equivalent is not demeaning. Or not as demeaning.
But in the end, for a woman to sleep around is no great shakes. Any woman, as long as she is not too fat or too old, can find someone who will sleep with her. For every man it is a struggle. For a man to sleep with a woman who already has a husband is harder.
So we may well condemn such a man. Social stability more or less demands it. But it will never be the same because what he does is difficult. He is proving that he is the sort of man that women like. Men may dislike him but women may well think otherwise. She is simply proving she is untrustworthy, unreliable and generally not worth much except a quick tumble.
It is not fair. It is not equal. But men and women are only equal in the eyes of God. Biologically speaking they are profoundly unequal. No matter how much we pretend otherwise.
If you don’t want to be ‘defined by a word’, maybe try not doing the thing that word means?
I had this argument with a rather demented New York artsy type recently. She thought promiscuity equated to feminist empowerment, but didn’t like it when people called her a slut. I asked her what she thought the word “slut” meant, and she said it is a negative word for women who are promiscuous. I asked her why she would consider the word negatively if it describes somebody engaged in feminist empowerment. She said the word implied negative connotations, which it does. I said if women want to avoid being described in a certain way they should perhaps change their behaviour. She didn’t like that.
But in the end, for a woman to sleep around is no great shakes. Any woman, as long as she is not too fat or too old, can find someone who will sleep with her. For every man it is a struggle. For a man to sleep with a woman who already has a husband is harder.
So we may well condemn such a man. Social stability more or less demands it. But it will never be the same because what he does is difficult. He is proving that he is the sort of man that women like.
This x 100. I tried to explain this to aforementioned demented New Yorker.
Plus, for all the complaints feminists make about “nobody cares if a man sleep around”, this is bullshit. Any woman with any self-respect and looking for a reliable partner is not going to be much interested in a bloke who shags around without much commitment or has a history of shagging sub-par women. Men can put themselves out of range of a decent woman by shagging the wrong type of women quite easily.
Tim Newman – “Any woman with any self-respect and looking for a reliable partner is not going to be much interested in a bloke who shags around without much commitment or has a history of shagging sub-par women. Men can put themselves out of range of a decent woman by shagging the wrong type of women quite easily.”
I agree that if a man shows that he f**ks fatties or the like, he is going to go down in other women’s eyes. But it is amazing what women will and will not tolerate. Charlie Sheen is not sleeping with sub-par women even though his taste is highly questionable.
Women do like men who sleep around. It is the “it will never happen to me” syndrome. She wants someone who can sleep with anyone but only has eyes for her. Of course it rarely works out this way. And in the end she has to settle for someone more reliable – and she is miserable for the rest of her days because he isn’t exciting.
I agree that if a man shows that he f**ks fatties or the like, he is going to go down in other women’s eyes. But it is amazing what women will and will not tolerate. Charlie Sheen is not sleeping with sub-par women even though his taste is highly questionable.
True.
Women do like men who sleep around. It is the “it will never happen to me” syndrome. She wants someone who can sleep with anyone but only has eyes for her. Of course it rarely works out this way.
Yeah, and sensible women generally figure this out in their early/mid 20s and cotton on that the guy who is shagging around isn’t good for an LTR. The women that don’t figure this out show up on online dating sites 10 years later.
And in the end she has to settle for someone more reliable – and she is miserable for the rest of her days because he isn’t exciting.
Or they find a middle ground. It does exist, but I agree, a lot don’t find it.
‘“mistress”, a term that has no similar male counterpart’
Gigolo? It even has negative connotations, just like mistress.
I wish to object strongly to the appalling word “manure”, which
(con’t p98)
A man is a “bachelor” but a woman is a “spinster”.
A man is a “bachelor” but a woman is a “honey”, a “fine catch”, a “young beauty”, a “debutante”. There are any number of words indicating a young woman is not yet married. No doubt Ms Valenti has never heard any of them.
We even use “female” words to insult men. On the first day of an English class I took in college, for example, the professor asked us what words were the worst things you could call a woman. In minutes, the board was filled with misogynist invectives – words like “slut” and “cunt”.
She misses the point – these are terms to describe women who fall short of the feminine ideal. A slut is a failed woman. She is of little value because she is actually in real life of little value.
When she asked us to do the same thing for men, the board filled up again: all the worst words you could use against a man – “bitch”, “pussy”, etc – were also distinctly female
Many are. Because again men fall short of the much tougher male ideal. He is a coward mainly. That is not distinctly female. She has just picked terms that happen to be female.
But why would we expect it to be otherwise? We want men to be men and women to be good women. The best way to do this is to tell them not to be bad women.
“Cock-juggling arse-badger” is definitely male. As is “spunktrumpet”.
This Valenti just needs new words.
Time to revive the word, “strumpet”. Would you prefer to watch “Rocco’s New York Strumpets” or “Rocco’s New York Mistresses”?
Richard
You hit the nail on the head – Has she not seen the film ‘American gigolo’? – probably not…….
Definitely “Strumpets” Rocco.
A “mistress” may well be expensive, demanding, possibly mad and it all seems a bit functional.
On the other hand, everyone loves a strumpet. A strumpet may even stand their round and a filthy laugh is pretty much guaranteed.
No contest.
“Whoremaster”.
“On the first day of an English class I took in college, for example, the professor asked us what words were the worst things you could call a woman. In minutes, the board was filled with misogynist invectives – words like “slut” and “cunt”.”
An English class? The first fucking day?
FOR FUCK’S SAKE.
Yesterday we had a thread about the dearth of female comedians.
Today Ms Valenti proves the point.
Well played, TW.
BiND, bis: a cuckold is the husband of an unfaithful wife, not the guy she’s being unfaithful with. The general purpose ‘lover’ would seem to fit the bill for that one. It’s a bit non-specific but usually context makes the meaning plain. ‘Gigolo’ doesn’t work as that has connotations of a male prostitute serially servicing (usually older) women.