Welcome to Hotel Satire—where traditional values inhabit our
tastefully decorated rooms, where the enterprise is free for those with the right
background and breeding, where dad is in command, the kids are at his feet, mom is in the
kitchen, lesbos are in jail, commies have all joined the Russian Mafia, and everyone is
praying for Armageddon to come, and soon, so we can start over and get it right this time.
People, and you gals. Summer is coming. A time when all good gals
contemplate what they will look like in shorts and bikinis, and ask that age old question
(as depicted in the Vogue ad below): "Are you femme enough?" The answer
is: No, you’re not. Let’s examine the following:
First off, a reader sent me a shocking April Discover magazine
article "New Women of the Ice Age," by Heather Pringle. It claims that new
studies show that the cave gals of Ice Age Europe were not mere cavewives but
"priestly leaders, clever inventors, and mighty hunters."
Bad enough that people are actually studying gals, in any era, but
the article also suggests that cave guys were not the mighty hunters we’ve always
thought them to be. It seems that cave guys weren’t necessarily killing mighty
beasts, singlehandedly, with spears. They were just waiting at watering holes for the
beasts to die and then scavenging them for food and bones, etc. While the caveguys were
scavenging, cavegals were bringing in 70 percent of the caloric intake, using nets to
catch their prey. This new knowledge that Ice Age gals were both hunters and gatherers,
i.e., lesbians, is sure to increase today’s gals lack of femmeness.
Second, check out the ad from Cosmo (above) depicting what
the first female president will be wearing on the campaign trail. Sure she’s got on a
simple black femme dress and a femme pearl necklace and earrings, with the underarms
nicely shaved, and a femme deodorant that’s "shower fresh" and
"invisible dry." But what the heck is that gal doing trying to "leave her
mark on the world, not on her skin?" This is no femme.
Third, have you heard about the "Bandit Queen," Phoolan
Devi? Check this out. She was a poor villager in India who was assaulted by her husband at
age 11 and then gang-raped repeatedly by higher-caste men and even police. She retaliated
by forming a group of male bandits who stole from upper castes while leaving gals and
children alone. She road horseback in khaki fatigues, no less, toting a double-barreled
shotgun and wearing her signature red scarf. She allegedly ordered 20 of her rapists
killed. After two years she surrendered and spent 11 years in jail, until a new government
freed her in 1994. A heroine to many, she was elected to Parliament in 1996. She says,
"This is nice, being in society. But I felt more powerful then, when I was a bandit.
Sometimes I think I shouldn’t have surrendered."
Can this be tolerated? Sure she used men to do the robbing and
killing, which is somewhat femme. But robbing rich people wearing khaki fatigues? Clearly,
not even femme, let alone enough.
Fourth, take the Wendt divorce case. Have you heard of this? A
corporate wife, Lorna Wendt, demanded $50 million in a divorce suit against her husband,
Gary Wendt, claiming she contributed to a 50-50 partnership—giving her husband
advice, hostessing lavish parties, and making small talk with foreign dignitaries. Gary
claimed the family fortune came from his 21 years of hard work at GE, not his wife’s
housekeeping. In the settlement, Lorna didn’t get the $50 million but she did get
more than $15 million in cash and real estate, plus alimony of $250,000 per year,
indefinitely. This is a shocking precedent.
Sure, Lorna was femme for a while—arranging the parties and
making small talk. Yes, she was femme enough to be financially dependent on a man. But
once she was no longer his wife, she shouldn’t get anything. Why? Because he’s
gonna have to pay someone else to provide the services Lorna used to do for free.
It’s gonna get expensive. Because it’s not femme to be financially independent.
Or to raise a national debate on the heart of married life, as Paul Barrett writes in the Wall
Street Journal (December 4, 1997): "Is marriage an economic as well as an
emotional partnership? What is the value of staying home with the kids? What obligation do
wives have to promote their husband’s careers?"
Fifth, check out this shocking statistic from somewhere on the
Internet: "The average American woman weighs 144 pounds and wears between a size 12
and size 14." This is distressingly unfemme.
Gals, you need to ask, "What will it take to be femme enough?
Well, we’ve already touched on a few no no’s: No hunting when you should be
gathering; No clever inventing when you should be sitting in the cave whipping up a hungry
man meal for your cave guy; No running for president, much less getting elected—it
causes unsightly perspiration marks; No making a mark on the world; No khaki fatigues,
toting of guns, or retaliation for anything a man may do to you; No claiming rights to
your hubby’s hard-earned cash regardless of the quantity of services you perform for
him. He’s working hard, you’re doing it for love and the chance to shop.
Gals, let’s face it, in answer to the question, "How can I
be femme enough?" the answer has to be, "You can never be femme enough."
But you can come close. Here’s how. First, wear something pink at all times. The gal
in the Vogue ad is wearing a nice pink suit, and she’s very femme. Next get
thinner—105 pounds is the only weight that is truly femme enough. Then, arm yourself.
Not with a gun, but with your weakness (see ad below). A single strand of pearls and some
nice pearl earrings would have done wonders on that bandit queen. Also, never do anything
to make you glisten, perspire, or sweat—like running for president, or taking your
hubbies hard-earned millions. But just in case, use a nice lady-like deodorant, okay?
Thin, weak, sweat- less, and wearing pink— that’s just
about femme enough.