It has been a long day and I am rather tired, and, quite frankly, I've gotten out of the rhythm of posting
a lot at all, but this "blog post gone viral" deserves at least a quick mention if only to share with my tiny band of fellow travelers the irony of a woman blogger melting down on her blog over a guest post by another woman written about how bitchy and emotional other women are, all the while maintaining the unassailable conviction that there are no discernible differences between men and women because SCIENCE! proves it.
The hot irony. It burns. (Yeah? So iron my damn shirts, woman!)
The hijinks begin immediately upon a visit to the blog's main page where Clarissa, the owner of the blog, is bitching about how she never has any of her posts go viral and that it is always some other woman's post that gets all the attention.
WWWWWWHAAAAAAAAAA! WAAAAAA! WAAAAAAAA! WAAAAAAAAAA!
Miss Clarissa whines:
Life is unfair, my friends. I have written a multitude of posts, thousands of comments, discussed, talked, offered support and advice, distributed insults, raged, pontificated, preached, linked, reviewed, photographed, formed lasting human connections, antagonized, etc.
Yet the only two times I ever managed to go viral was with the posts that were not even written by me. The first time was with the tree test post and today I have gone viral again with the Entrepreneur’s post on female employees.
It’s time to face it, I will never be able to make myself relevant to the mainstream with anything I manage to produce on my own. (Emphasis lovingly added by moi.)
Clarissa's post about being passed over again and again, despite her indefatigable and notably superior efforts at spreading her matchless wisdom, would be outrageously funny theater on its own, if only for the seriousness of her existential crisis willingly shared with all of us strangers who simply could not give less of a shit, but her behavior becomes circus theater as she stamps her little figurative feet and has a complete editorial hissy fit over the attention given her guest's post and the numerous comments agreeing with the premise of the popular post. And she doesn't like it. Not one bit.
WARNING: People in the past 2 hours I have had to Spam 63 comments from losers who tried to inform me that “men and women are psychologically / emotionally, etc. different.” Once again, anybody who embarrasses him or herself by chirping idiotically “yes, men and women are different” will be banned outright. This will be my small investment into sparing these losers further public embarrassment. Stop wasting your time, such comments are not going through on my blog. (Emphasis and underlining and whiny-ass temper tantrum belong entirely to the blog author, Miss Clarissa. I didn't have to do anything to make this funnier.)
So we are supposed to be convinced -- and if not convinced, summarily banned -- that SCIENCE! has proven men and women are essentially the same. And we are to be so convinced by the lovely Miss Clarissa as she melts down all over the page in the most deliciously bitchy stereotypical hissy fit I've witnessed in ages.
Well, I don't know about you, but I'm convinced. Handled it just like a man.
The viral blog post that sparked Miss Clarissa's gender-neutral tirade, entitled, "I Don't Want to Hire Women," is a detailed account of just how very, very different women are from men. The guest author, who unfairly stole all of Miss Clarissa's richly deserved attention, notes that these differences are displayed in excessive demands for emotional attention and constant reinforcement, easily bruised feelings, distressingly sensitive reactions to the often harsh reality encountered in business, back-biting and gossip, and the seemingly superficial commitment to one's own career.
The entire blog post is about how women and men are different. The. entire. fucking. thing.
However, if a commenter makes the grave mistake of assuming that a blog post on the differences between men and women actually invites commentary on the differences between men and women, why he or she will be banned, as per Miss Clarissa, to prevent him or her from "public embarrassment."
Well, this is certainly handling the situation just like any man.
And intellectually honest, besides.
Of course, the comments, those that have been allowed, remarkably all question the author's motives, skills at hiring and management of people, ulterior motives, ideology, etc.
One commenter raises some insightful, and allowed, questions:
I’m not sure if the original author will be around to answer questions but I’ve got a few:
1. How sure are you that these situations are not the result of your own attitude? Maybe you are prejudice against women and look for proof that they are not good enough in situations where you let men employees slide?
2. Have you tried talking to these female employees to see what their response is?
3. How would it make you feel if you were refused a shot at employment because the employer disliked women?
You can peruse them, but frankly, they all run along these lines.