You don't want to look at AFS. This is prettier... and pretty accurate. |
Curmie actually knows, or, more accurately, knew Mr. Gigot, who was editor-in-chief of the undergraduate daily newspaper for which Curmie was a columnist, critic, sometime reporter, and frequent arts page day editor. Gigot was a pompous prat 40-something years ago. As Curmie noted on a friend’s FB page, in this time of uncertainty it is reassuring to know that some things don’t change. But here’s the thing: then, and one presumes now, Gigot wasn’t/isn’t stupid. The stereotypical privileged white male, yes; an idiot, no.
In other words, Gigot knows full well that his defense of AFS is disingenuous. He’s de facto lying, because that is what he is paid to do, and his job is waaaaaay cushier than Curmie’s, so it’s understandable that he’d want to keep the overlords satisfied. But that doesn’t earn any sympathy in Curmieville.
Let me first stipulate that if the WSJ’s editorial policy is to use the term “Dr.” only for “medical doctors” (the extent to which this designation extends past MDs is unclear: dentists? chiropractors? veterinarians?), that is their prerogative: Curmie thinks it’s a dumb idea, but it’s far less annoying than most of their editorial decisions. If they really did, unlike most of the mainstream media, refer to Henry Kissinger as “Mr.,” then they are free to refer to refer to Dr. Biden as “Ms.” or even “Mrs.” But singling out the holder of an advanced degree for ridicule because she chooses to actually claim the honorific she has earned (yes, earned, unlike AFS’s single honorary post-baccalaureate degree): that’s petulant at best. And “Mr.” Kissinger certainly made damned sure everybody within earshot knew he had a doctorate, without being told the term was in any way inappropriate.
Gigot, as mentioned above, is not so unschooled in the ways of the world that he honestly believes the “torrent” of criticism AFS’s smug and borderline incoherent rant was orchestrated by Biden operatives, but it sure sounds better to the base than “virtually every academic on the planet ripped us a new one for being sexist, anti-intellectual, and more than a little bit envious.” Of course the political handlers got in on the act, but the lion’s share of the response didn’t know that anyone from the Biden camp per se had entered the fray. Curmie found out about it from a friend who, like Jill Biden, is a female educator with an advanced degree. Curmie sure as hell doesn’t take marching orders from anyone named Biden. He voted for the now President-Elect as the lesser of two evils. That’s as far as it goes.
Curmie has already said he’s not convinced of the argument that “this would never be written about a man,” although there’s a good chance that it’s true. AFS’s puerile little outburst strikes Curmie as more of a desperate shot at anyone associated with the President-Elect, although AFS goes out of his way to self-identify as a sexist (and a racist), so it’s difficult to fault those who view the screed through that lens.
Gigot then sniffs that “Nearly every publication wrote about the Biden response, reinforcing the Biden-New York Times line: “An Opinion Writer Argued Jill Biden Should Drop the ‘Dr.’ (Few Were Swayed.)” Don’t you just hate it when journalists tell the truth? Fact is, with the exception of the usual suspects—the always smarmy, seldom accurate, Tucker Carlson, for example—virtually everyone who read AFS’s op-ed thought he was… well, an AFS.
Gigot moves on to justify AFS’s fecal outburst as “fair comment,” and takes as evidence an 11-year-old article in which Joe Biden is quoted as saying that his wife’s interest in pursuing a doctorate was because she was “sick of the mail coming to Sen. and Mrs. Biden,” wanting to get mail addressed to “Dr. and Sen. Biden.” Dear, dear, Paul. You had no sense of humor in the ‘70s, and I’m saddened to see you haven’t developed one. That line is what we in the trade call a joke. You may have heard the term.
Biden’s line is not literally true (and even if it were, it would be irrelevant). Curmie has been quoted as saying that he chose Kansas over Illinois and Florida State for his doctorate because he liked the colors of their regalia hood better. He does indeed rather like the crimson and blue, but the actual decision was made for rather more substantive reasons. See the parallel?
Similarly, AFS doesn’t get off the hook for the patronizing “kiddo” line because Joe has sometimes called Jill that. Curmie and Beloved Spouse have been known to crack open a bottle of wine and toast each other with a Bogie-inspired “here’s looking at you, kid.” Anyone else who calls her “kid” within my earshot will be lucky to leave the premises with a full set of teeth.
Then, of course, we see that despite the misogynistic tone of the entire essay, men with honorary degrees are also deflated by AFS’s rapier wit. Newsflash: honorary degrees have nothing to do with whether someone with an earned doctorate can legitimately be referred to as “doctor.” Easy answer: yes. Next question?
A couple other points come to mind. The GOP and their minions in the right-wing press (or is it the right-wing press and their minions in the GOP?) have spent the vast majority of 2020 demeaning the expertise of MDs whose actual knowledge about epidemiology runs counter to the ravings of the Mad King of Trumpistan. Now, all of a sudden, doctors (that kind of doctors) must be protected from the incursions of those wild-eyed and glory-hungry PhDs and EdDs. Curious.
Side note: Curmie recalls a conversation with his dentist a few years back. There had been an article about me in the local newspaper—I don’t remember what it was about, but I was listed as “Dr.” He wanted to know if he should call me that. My response was that if he was visiting me in my professional capacity, perhaps. But I was visiting him in his, so no. It strikes me that if we’re going to have a FLOTUS who, as Dr. Biden has indicated, will make education her signature concern, having an EdD tends to suggest a little more confidence in her expertise than, say, having posed for some soft-core porn photos.
The relevance of Dr. Biden’s degree is at least as significant as the military rank of the stream of so-called experts the likes of Fox News trot out whenever they need some presumed authority to mouth the political sloganeering du jour. But—speaking of sexist, racist assholes—what do they do about, say, “Colonel” Sanders, whose military-sounding title, which he insisted on using, was in fact an honorary position in the Kentucky state militia, granted because he was a crony of the governor… and rich? (Curmie had a dear friend who was also a “Kentucky Colonel” but never mentioned it.)
Finally, Paul Gigot of all people knows that saying publicly that AFS is a weak, terrified, and rather mediocre man confronted by a woman with better credentials than his own is nowhere near the “censorship” alluded to in the final paragraph of the rebuttal statement. AFS, Gigot, and their brethren in pompous twatwaffledom are free to write whatever they choose, provided they do not incite violence or outright lie about objective reality. Their musings, like Curmie’s, are subjective. But not being censored and not being censured are different things. If the entire purpose of your essay is to be “provocative," you can’t avoid those who disagree... and who just might be smarter than you.
It is December, and the snowflakes are falling.
No comments:
Post a Comment