Although many – perhaps most – regular readers refused to participate in yesterday’s poll (which I expected), enough people responded to conclusively demonstrate that Jessica Valenti is better looking than Amanda Marcotte. This also should have been expected, as Valenti looks more like a real woman than Marcotte, who is built like a boy. However, a few readers thought Marcotte would be better in bed (a plausible assumption), which may explain why she received at least 20% of the vote.
Several readers asked why on earth I would introduce such a poll. Opus, who suggested that women, including feminists, tend to see the world as a beauty pageant, was closest to the mark. Men respond to female attractiveness on a primal level, in much the same manner they respond to food. However, the social implications are far more profound for women. Being attractive is at least as important to women as being “respected” is to men. A woman who wins a beauty contest feels the same rush and euphoria that a man who wins a sports championship does. This is really what’s behind women’s anger about objectification paired with persistent attempts to make themselves the object of attention. It’s frustration about not being the only object of desire. One will never hear a beauty queen complain about objectification; she’s too busy basking in all the attention from her admirers.
If you think about it, feminism is a sort of female attempt to democratize female sexuality. Ironically, the goal is similar to Christian monogamy, which attempts to guarantee that every man can have a a wife, but it has a distinctly female twist: it attempts to create a sort of “hypergamy for all,” which is impossible in the long run, but does work to some extent for young women. Unfortunately, this subjects young men to intense competitive pressure, as their sexually liberated female counterparts can carry on with several higher-status men simultaneously. The real feminist rage over objectification, slut-shaming, foreign brides and the like is that it might advantage some women at the expense of others (feminists in particular). They really don’t want to have to compete for the desirable men — they want equal access.
However, in the spirit of fair play, I think as long as feminists demand that lower status men (many of whom are young and horny) face more intense selective pressure from potential mates, it’s only fair to turn the tables and subject feminists to the same scrutiny. If it’s fair to judge a man according to his status, why not a woman according to her beauty? Perhaps the most common feminist pejorative directed at men is “loser.” If that isn’t a status judgment, what is? Is it any worse for a man to call a woman a “dog” than it is for a feminist to call a man a “loser?” Not at all. The two are equally judgmental.
So, from here on out I’m going to have regular “pageants” comparing feminists to each other solely based on sex appeal, and I will publish the results. They will be noticed, because the results will be honest and to the point instead of the kind of feel-good “we’re all beautiful” garbage the feminists deceptively say to each other to create a sense of “solidarity and sisterhood.” When it comes to this kind of thing, women actually want to know the truth, and it’s now been fairly conclusively demonstrated that Jessica Valenti is more attractive than Amanda Marcotte. Sorry Amanda — you lose this round.
Readers should feel free to submit other feminists for future pageants. I’ll try to make them at least somewhat competitive, and let’s try to keep the real dogs like Dworkin out of it so as not to induce nausea. I think this will turn out to be a fun little feature, and it will make a nice little point.