After thoroughly reading the two entries of “The Death of
Pretty” by Pat Archbold as well as “Men Growing Up to Be Boys” by Lakshmi
Chaudhry I came to the conclusion that both of these authors have some of the
same ways of thinking about us as a generation as compared to earlier
generations as far as the look we want to portray for ourselves. I think that
if these two authors were having a meal together for the first time that they
would have an absolute ball. I believe that Archbold would be rambling on about
how women are dumbing their selves down to get the attention of men more, and I
think that Chaudhry would be going on and on about how men are not growing up
how they should be. I could be wrong, they could have a terrible and awkward time
because quite frankly, to me they seem like two bitter people with strong
views. However, if you want my opinion, I think these two authors would have
the time of their lives not only talking about how different our generation is
but also mocking us and bashing the people that are around them that fit the
description of, like Archbold stated, “hot”.
I disagree with you in the aspect about them being better not talking about the difference between the old generation and the new one. It is very beneficial for both of them to share their opinion to each other, about men and women. That will allow them to think more in many different ways about how men and women portrait themselves to society. They might not completely have the same ideals, but for sure, they will enjoy their different opinions. If I was having dinner with both of the authors, I would like them to tell me more about how men can change to become more responsible. More importantly as a girl, I would ask pat why guys prefer pretty over hotness. If men like bragging about having a hot girl not just an innocent girl. I would not start an argument between the two authors because I believe they have good arguments about the difference about men and women though generation.
ReplyDeleteWere I a member of this dinner meeting, I don't think I'd have the willpower to bite my tongue and I feel like I'd be calling out both parties in this discussion. Archbold's poorly written blog reads like a high-schooler's attempt at social commentary, going only to the surface level and making awful generalizations without any kind of basis to his argument. An argument based simply off of his own observations (especially when he tries to speak for ALL straight men, saying that they actually prefer "pretty!") is laughable- the man clearly needs to look more into the psychology of social and gender norms. I'd be telling him that it's absolutely not his place to define what a woman should try to be or what image they would try to project.
ReplyDeleteAs for Chaudhry, she clearly researched her piece more and has a much more substantial argument, yet most of it is simply based on hearsay and quotes from other authors. The few statistics she does provide are next to useless and only serve as winded attempts to bolster a baseless argument. With these two at the table together, though, I'd doubt I could get a word in edgewise since they'd be too busy agreeing with each other and probably mocking any young people they see. This is not a dinner I would willingly attend.
I agree that the two authors would agree perfectly well. Both of the views they expressed are clearly rooted in out-dated social norms.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Jacob, after looking at these two actual pieces of work, I noticed a little bit of irony... Chaudhry, who's main point is that men are starting to become more immature and less responsible, is almost proven by Archbold, who's blog lacks evidence and basically sounds like a bitter old man who was too lazy to find supporting statistics and examples other than the stars he probably saw on the cover of People or Star.