Nasty Women VS Nasty Men: Is One Worse Than the Other?

Is it me, or is nastiness from a woman harder to take than from a man? I wondered this after I read on a woman’s review of a book by a female author.

The commentary was below-the-garter-belt awful. OK, no one wears a garter belt any more, but that’s the best I can do late on Saturday night (with Before Sunset in the DVD player waiting for when I finish this blog).

[For all you Gen X and younger folks, a garter belt is what women had to wear to hold up individual nylon stockings BEFORE pantyhose was invented. Boy am I dating myself with that reference. Back in the day didn’t every girl hate those things? Almost as bad as sanitary belts—don’t get me started on those!]

Back to the book review…

It was on Arianna Huffington’s newly published book titled, Third World America: How Our Politicians are Abandoning the Middle Class and Betraying the American Dream. Great title. I don’t even need to read the book as I agree with that statement.

The review that floored me was by a woman named Ann from Idaho. She states her last name. Which may be a code word for “Coulter.” She rated the book one star. Here is her first sentence as written:

“huffington is your classic liberal woman in every way. so wanting to have the boys continue to give her their attention even as her baren body and plumped up face continue to age. the liberal women will do anything not to give up the attention and that, of course, means no children so you have plenty of time to ‘help’ the poor.”

First of all Ms. Huffington isn’t “baren” — or barren—as it should be spelled. She has two daughters. (From everything I’ve read Ms. Huffington has a great relationship with them AND her mother.) But the head-scratcher here is, what bearing does child-status have on the ability to write a cogent political argument?

Since when does the use of female reproductive organs determine one’s political correctness, writing ability, and/or intellectual capacity? If this were true, wouldn’t Michelle Duggar be the logical choice for President of the United States?

AnnHo (abbreviation of Ann from IdaHO) displays that really annoying characteristic I call Motherhood Arrogance; i.e. women with children think they are better than women who haven’t given birth.

I also think this “I’ve used my womb to procreate and you haven’t” criticism is strictly a misguided woman’s beef. I can’t see a “normal” man using this subject matter to discredit a woman’s opinion. He would just call her a Femi-Nazi. (But I don’t listen to Gush Limpbough. This isn’t his turf is it? EGADS if it is!)

Back to AnnHo. What’s with the “classic liberal woman…wanting to have the boys…give her their attention…”? HUH? Is she implying Ms. Huffington’s mission in life is to attract guys? Oh brother…

And what’s with the “plumped up face” comment? Again, who cares? (For the record, I don’t see a plumped up face on Ms. Huffington.) A plump or non-plump face doesn’t add or subtract to the validity of any person’s political view.  It only matters to nattering nabobs of negativism (thank you, Mr. Safire) and other assorted idiots.

In addition, does it make sense to anyone with an IQ higher than a celery stick (thank you, Dave Barry) that only people without children have time to “help the poor?” YEEZ. Do I have to list people with kids who contribute their time and money to charities/helping others?

AnnHo then goes on SLAM the middle class, who she says are:

“really the endemic ghetto/poor/housing project class who have decided that life is just a bit too comfortable at the bottom of the barrel where they can scream at social workers…”

AnnHo rants on, themiddle class” … “has plenty of money to tattoo their supersize bodies…” and blah blah blah until the end, where she finishes her tirade with:

“the ultra liberals like huffington with their fortunes and their soirees and their wine parties where they pat each other on the back for their…well, not sure what for, after all, their liberalism consigns the children of these cretins to a life of absolutely no opportunity…cretin is as cretin does.”

Am I missing something? Is this review one big joke by Colbert or somebody similar? [Note: This review would make a great skit on Saturday Night Live, verbatim.]

If not, this invective says way more about AnnHo than it does about Ms. Huffington.

I also find it ickier that a woman wrote it. Had this come from a man, I would have thought, No biggie, another dickwad with a tiny ax in his pants to grind.

I guess I have higher standards for women than I do for men? Or I think women are “more civilized” than men?

As of today, only 6 out of 74 people on found AnnHo’s review helpful. I think the six who thought it “helpful” was because it helped them laugh out loud at the absurdity of it all.

I’m one of the 74 who voted ‘not helpful.’ However, that’s not quite true as it provided me a great topic for a blog.

The review also prompted me to buy the book as a protest for such an ugly review.

Lastly, it gave me another addition to the Fuchsia Woman Icky Women’s Club.

That would be you, AnnHo. Congrats on this dubious achievement.


Your “Liberal = Normal” Pal,

Miss Tonette


  • Adele said:

    Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!

    Monday, September 20, 2010
  • Marcus said:

    I’m glad that I found your site. There are a couple of interesting articles.

    Saturday, November 13, 2010