Few people are as experienced at generating controversy as US essayist Caitlin Flanagan, who has previously incited female ire with her takes on everything from housewives (“Women have a deeply felt emotional connection to housekeeping”) and working mothers (“At a certain point a mother must choose between her work and her child”) to the flaws of Joan Didion.
Last week, Flanagan’s new book Girl Land, which argues that the Internet has a destabilizing effect on teenage girls, was published in the US, and promptly kickstarted an Internet war.
“The current culture, with its driving imperatives of exhibitionism, of presenting oneself to the world in the most forward and blasting way possible, has made the experience of Girl Land especially charged and difficult,” Flanagan writes. “There is no such thing as a private experience any more ... I would contend that [this] is most punishing to girls.”
US critics have been swift to disagree. In the New York Times, Emma Gilbey Keller accused Flanagan of “old-fashioned archetypes and abstractions;” at New York magazine, Meghan O’Rourke accused her of perpetuating “a tired picture of girls as victims-in-the-making;” while in a detailed takedown on Salon.com, Irin Carmon concluded: “Flanagan is too lacking in empathy and too interested in imposing the contours of her own life and her own conservative counter-rebellion to shed much light on them.”
That last piece led to an intense debate between the two women on National Public Radio’s On Point, culminating in Flanagan asking a stunned Carmon: “What could we adults have done to help you with your dating relationships [at high school]?”
The subsequent Twitter storm saw prominent US writers from the New York Times’ Rebecca Traister to the New Yorker’s Emily Nussbaum weigh in.
“I’m not sure why having a boyfriend is a measure of your health as a young woman,” tweeted Traister while Jessica Valenti, author of The Purity Myth, adding: “Wow, I’m really glad you have someone like her looking out for [...] your high-school dating life.”
The 28-year-old Carmon admits she was surprised by Flanagan’s attack.
“I didn’t expect her to try and psychoanalyze me or fix my childhood,” she says. “I feel that she spoke to me ... with contempt and profound condescension.”
For Carmon, the bigger issue remains Flanagan’s failure to place female adolescent experience in a wider context.
“Most of the e-mails I got after that interview were from fathers,” she says. “A lot of men disliked the way that she places all the responsibility on girls and women to make sure that boys and men treat them right.”
Flanagan, a self-described “pro-abortion, pro-gay rights Democrat,” is unrepentant.
“She brought her personal life into the discussion. She said: ‘I was on the Internet as a teenager and I’m fine,’” she said of Carmon. “She’s young and she’s of that sexting, hooking-up culture. And I felt it was fair enough to ask: ‘How did it go for you with boys at high school?’ I wasn’t surprised that it didn’t go well.”
Flanagan argues that her book is only divisive because people are afraid to confront the reality of the Internet.
“I think people my age — I’m 50 — are anxious not to seem fuddy duddy and so they become huge advocates of Internet use,” she said. “Girls need a time when they’re not constantly assailed by what everyone thinks about them or about what they wore to school.”
“I’m not against the Internet,” she says. “My issue is that there’s a coarsening and deadening, which I don’t think would exist without the Internet. I think this has led to an adolescent hook-up, sexting culture, which in turn means that young girls can graduate from college without having had a relationship based on more than sex. I think that lack of love or affection is hard on the female spirit.”
But isn’t this argument falling back on a tired “nice girls don’t put out” argument?
“Girls are much more in charge of their social life with boys than they realize,” she said. “Young men will do anything to get female attention and I think if you say: ‘Treat me well, I’m not sure about you, study me like a book or a movie or a concert,’ then that is what courtship culture is about.”
She refutes claims that Girl Land is saturated with nostalgia.
“It’s nonsense to say that teenage girls today don’t like romance. An entire romance industry worth billions of dollars is driven not by boys, but by adolescent girls,” she said.
As an argument, it’s not convincing. For in Flanagan’s Girl Land there are two choices: a romantic retreat into a sepia-tinted past, or a plunge into the maelstrom of girls performing oral sex on strangers. The reality is more complicated and less lurid. For boys and girls, adolescence is a time when mistakes will be made and directions changed. It’s a case of finding the way that makes life work for you. Girl Land shines more of a light on the psyche of Caitlin Flanagan than the hearts of teenage girls.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations