Jezebel Site and xoJane Site: Pot Meet Kettle – On Supporting All Women’s Voices

Jezebel Site and xoJane Site: Pot Meet Kettle – On Supporting All Women’s Voices

I saw this paragraph or so in (Link): an article on Jezebel’s site (by S. Edwards; title: “xoJane Publishes Terrible Article By a Woman Who’s Glad Her Friend Died, Then Deletes Her Byline“):

  • It’s a well-known fact that outrageous confessionals—the kind that populate xoJane’s section, It Happened to Me — garner traffic. Outrage, disgust and anger are the stuff of going viral (a phrase that conjures up disease as much as anything else). Yet xoJane seems to consistently cross an unspoken line, confusing any woman’s opinion as one inherently worth publishing, no matter the opinion, or its costs.

  • …It’s a system of mutual exploitation of sorts, xoJane’s editors meet traffic goals while writers like Lauren get attention. Lauren has a history of writing so-called “provocative pieces.”
  • Her byline graces essays like, “Staying Hot For My Husband is ESSENTIAL to a Successful Marriage,” on YourTango and “I Think Husband Hunting in College Is Actually a Good Idea,” also on xoJane. The latter, a celebration of Princeton Mom, speaks to exactly where Lauren maps her literary (ahem) affinities: namely, that being the most hated woman in the news cycle is good for the bottom line.
  • …“The genre, to me,” Jia recently wrote, “has always seemed like an attempt to spin gold out of shit and straw.” But in this case, xoJane hasn’t managed to produce any gold, just shit.

I would like to make clear that I’m in agreement that the woman writer they are originally pillorying on Jezebel – the one who feels it’s acceptable to marginalize someone with mental health issues and thinks it’s great this friend with mental health problems is dead – is an insensitive bitch. That’s not my issue with the Jez piece or its commentators. I’m in agreement with them on that much.

In particular, I wanted to address this part:

  • Yet xoJane seems to consistently cross an unspoken line, confusing any woman’s opinion as one inherently worth publishing, no matter the opinion, or its costs.

The Jezebel site does that very thing, however, which I’ve blogged on before:

From time to time, I see blog posts on Jezebel whose authors suggest that being a feminist, or to be someone who truly supports women, you (especially if you are a woman), absolutely must support any and all other choices and actions of all other women everywhere.

(Of course, all writers at Jez being left wing, do not really mean that in regards to right wing women, of course.)

But their site suggests that a woman must support any and all opinions and actions of other women. Why, I have no idea.

I am a woman. In general terms, I support other women, even ones whose views I disagree with (in that, I support their right to publish and publicize their opinions), but this does not mean I have to like their opinions or their actions.

Now, here Jezebel is criticizing writers and editors at another site (XO Jane) for supposedly blindly supporting any and all female voices, no matter what.

Well, FFS, from what I have seen from having read their site off and on the past several years, Jezebel’s motto or credo is for women to support all female voices, no matter what (unspoken rule: unless that female voice is Christian, conservative, pro-life, or Republican).

Therefore, I find this latest Jezebel post calling out XO Jane for this issue a little hypocritical.

I also note that many of the comments under that article on Jez are by women who are very hostile towards the xoJane site. Hi, ladies commenting there on Jez, under that article? Jez does a lot of the same stuff that they (and you) are throwing stones at xoJane for.


Related Posts:

(Link): So According to Some Feminists Believing in Female Equality Means Supporting All Actions and Behaviors by All Females Ever – Even their Pubic Hair Photos and Bloody Vagina T Shirt Designs? What?

(Link): On Miley Cyrus Being Sexual at 2013 VMAs – Hypocrisy of Secular Feminists

(Link): Inconsistency on Feminist Site – Choices Have Consequences

(Link):  Celibate Shaming from an Anti- Slut Shaming Secular Feminist Site (Hypocrisy) Feminists Do Not Support All Choices

(Link):  Hypocrisy: Secular Pundits Judge Christian Sexuality: Josh Duggar’s So-Called Vanilla Sexual Preferences Deemed Dull

(Link): Marcotte (secular, leftwing feminist) on Anyone Choosing To Be a Virgin Until Marriage: “It’s a Silly Idea” – What Progressive Christians, Conservative Christians, Non Christians, and Salon’s Amanda Marcotte Gets Wrong About Christian Views on Virginity

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s