» News

An Elegy for Two Once-Divine Female Critics

Home - by - December 9, 2012 - 11:00 America/New_York - 14 Comments

American Thinker

As recently as five years ago, I counted Ann Coulter and Camille Paglia among my favorite authors, and my guiltiest but most delicious reading pleasures.

In the famous tome Sexual Personae (1991), Camille Paglia drove a fearless bulldozer over the grove of feminist shibboleths, celebrating a street-smart feminism poised against the frigid and increasingly tiresome academic left.  For much of the Clinton era, it was refreshing to hear her devilish witticisms.  Her main target was the ironic puritanism of leftists who sought to liberate sex yet ended up ruining love with political guilt.  Among the feminists Camille pilloried, men were to be lectured about sexism when they found females pretty. The lectures were worse than Catholic sermons against impure thoughts. The antidote was naturally Paglia’s own blend of impishness and erudition.

I must admit, I took the medicine gleefully.  Who can resist an enfant terrible who publishes books like Vamps and Tramps (1994)?  Paglia was fabulous.

On the other end of the political spectrum, a different Venus crawled out of the swamp of Bill and Hillary’s bimbo eruptions like Botticelli’s deity washing up on the shores of Cyprus.  Blonde, leggy, and unapologetic about any perceived contradictions, Ann Coulter was born — like Paglia, a ferocious huntress with her arrows aimed squarely at the liberal elite’s hypocrisy.  Just as Camille would spare no scrutiny of feminists’ self-defeating phobias about heterosexuality, so Ann was unflinching about the feminists’ bargain with Bill Clinton, not to mention the rest of the left’s smelly gaggle of womanizing creeps.  Blessed with a wit no less sharp than Alexander Pope’s, Coulter delighted self-discovering conservatives with appropriately titled invectives like Slander (2003), Treason (2004), Godless (2007), and Guilty (2008).

There is something about true wit, of the kind one remembers from Pope’s Dunciad or Juvenal’s sixteen satires, which runs roughshod over partisan boundaries. Paglia was irresistible to many conservatives.  Coulter was a clandestine addiction for many liberals, who would read her Wednesday columns while never admitting to it at cocktail parties.

But it’s been a bad year for both women. Watching great people fall is excruciating, whether it’s David Petraeus suddenly exposed as a “Pentagon peacock” seeking shameless adulation from a starry-eyed groupie twenty years his junior or Paglia publishing a strange screed in The Hollywood Reporter.  The latter got more play than usual because Drudge reposted it.

Paglia feels offended, even disgusted, by young female singers who are “winsome” and the “latest sweetheart.”  Gone is the playfulness of Camille’s earlier attacks against people like Andrea Dworkin and Hillary Clinton.  Oblivious to the fact that a younger generation of Americans, born in the 1980s, saw how much women actually benefited from acting like a perpetual sex-crazed succubus à la Madonna — they got lots of guilt-ridden abortions, chlamydia, babies without responsible daddies, and still no magical equality to men at the office — and largely decided to opt out of relentless vixenhood, Camille chastises them for monstrous vices such as “modesty.”  Here’s a blast from her piece (boldface in original):  more

» 14 Comments

  1. John Cooper

    December 9th, 2012

    Coulter pretty much lost me when she claimed that Romney was a conservative but Gingrich wasn’t.

    Thumb up +7

     
  2. norman einstein

    December 9th, 2012

    I used to enjoy Paglia…she was so eccentric and didn’t GAF.

    Coulter has always been in it for the money, IMHO, and governs herself accordingly.

    Thumb up +4

     
  3. Name Redacted™

    December 9th, 2012

    I read the Paglia article this week, and I also found it kind of…shallow. Hollywood is ruining women? It’s been doing that for decades. However, the women she picks on are making megabucks, so I don’t know if they are “ruined.” Maybe they just found the magic formula of the era to get rich.

    Ann Coulter has always been bold, but she way overdid it in recent years by trying to turn her preferences into predictions. A little more caution and humility would have left her with a lot less egg on her face at present. I think, with a little time and soul-searching, Ann will be back. We need every ballsy, loud-mouthed soldier we’ve got in this battle.

    The author of the AT article, a Latino, presents an example of Ann “blaming” Latinos for the loss of America’s future. There’s been a lot of desperate, flailing analysis, and quitting and nuttiness from our side after the election. I wish the conservative response after the lost election was a bit more controlled. We’ve been acting like ants with our nest disturbed, and the left is eating it up. We’re giving them even more joy than just the election win. I guess we’re all guilty of it, but the people in the public eye and Republican leadership need to pull their sh*t together, quick.

    Thumb up +4

     
  4. Claudia

    December 9th, 2012

    Ann Coulter could learn A LOT from Pamela Geller. You can be intelligent, ballsy and passionate, but until you have humility you can turn people against your cause.

    Pamela talks but she also listens without making the “you are so stupid” faces that Coulter makes. Pamela actually believes in her message; Coulter believes in making her point at the cost of the point. Pamela cares about people; Coulter cares about herself.

    I’ll have you know that my opinion of Ann Coulter was formed long before this last year. I loved what she said but her delivery was (and is) distasteful.

    Thumb up +8

     
  5. Jack Daniels

    December 9th, 2012

    HA!

    Go suck on THAT coulter!

    LIke I said 2 years ago, the minute she started bashing Palin and Cain, and letting us lowly conservatives know that we were not too bright unless we jumped on the romney train, I considered her a turncoat.

    She is a female mr. tingles.

    Thumb up +8

     
  6. A. Coulter-ish

    December 9th, 2012

    I LOVE me some Christie!

    Thumb up 0

     
  7. A. Coulter-ish

    December 9th, 2012

    I LOVE me some GOProud! Just because I am an gay activist org. adviser doesn’t mean I’m complicit…does it?

    Thumb up +1

     
  8. A. Coulter-ish

    December 9th, 2012

    I’m a HUGE advocate of traditional marriage…I just am never going to participate in it myself, and prefer to hang out with people like my buddy, Bill Maher.

    Thumb up 0

     
  9. A. Coulter-ish

    December 9th, 2012

    I LOVE me some controversy! It gets me lots of MSM face time, which, I think, translates into book sales.

    Thumb up +1

     
  10. A. Coulter-ish

    December 9th, 2012

     
  11. A. Coulter-ish

    December 9th, 2012

    I HATE the TEA Party! They kept that Great White Hope, SUPER CONSERVATIVE Romney from winning over Obama, and me from getting a Supreme Court appointment. Dirty homphobic bastards!

    Thumb up 0

     
  12. Name Redacted™

    December 9th, 2012

    Ha ha – great link, A. Coulter-ish! I guess your prediction DID come true!

    Thumb up +2

     
  13. JDavid

    December 9th, 2012

    All of the promises in the world for political spoils mean nothing if the candidate can’t (and never could) win. All that Coulter expected to benefit if Romney won now means less than nothing because she compromised professed principles to boost the RINO Establishment pick and to beat down the names and reputations of good conservative candidates in doing so.

    Betrayal by someone considered an ally is a MUCH more heinous crime than simply being an open enemy right along. Backstabbers get remembered with a special kind of long-lasting fury.

    Thumb up 0

     
  14. DEBORA Laurence

    December 10th, 2012

    Des annonces 100% gratuites sur portail2000.com/.Vous pouvez déposez votre petite annonce gratuitement.

    Thumb up 0