"beneath the faux-breezy boredom of tanenhaus’ tone is a kind of sexist rage that is simmering like that fatal attraction bunny."

i was re-reading myself, as one does, and thinking that, after that ann liv young post, this 90swoman post is maybe my favorite thing i’ve ever written on how bored The Heteropatriarchy is with us and how we are forever accused of being boring, or out of step with time.

also, doesn’t tanenhaus’s dry heat feel like power? what we’ve had to give up to get here. i take it personally. chris kraus’s comments about the therapeutic or psychoanalytic or confessional ‘I’” bug me not only because they seem affectively in tune with someone like tanenhaus, but because they resonate with accusations of feminist art and politics being stuck in the 60s, as though we actually worked out any of those issues, or anyone actually knows that much more about women’s lives now, beyond what we know about women and sex, which is the one thing no one is that scared to talk about, and that gets publicized partly because guys want to read about that, too. 

of course, part of what is so boring for women is that we aren’t supposed to talk about it, any of it, or if we do, it’s supposed to be in a certain way, which i don’t think has so much to do with being therapeutic as with being palatable and, yes, easily narrativized.

i think i’m getting hung up on a word. heaven. 

also: see one of my favorite pieces of art.