Can’t fight stereotype with stereotype
Jimmy Petrocelli | Friday, October 30, 2009
Dear Meghan Dougher (“University of ugly girls,” Oct. 28),
I’m sorry to be the one to tell you, but your attempt to combat the Notre Dame female stereotype will fail miserably. In addition to being incredibly cliché, your article is ridden with hypocrisy.
As a woman who claims to be opposed to negative stereotypes, it seems that your opposition only extends to stereotypes that include yourself. I’m sure the film majors at Notre Dame do not appreciate your assertion that “this last [opinion] needs to be taken with a grain of salt, however, since the speaker is a film major. He might be more into woman’s fashion than most other guys.” Meghan, I do not personally know any film majors. However, from your article, I guess I should assume that they are all ignorant? Flamboyant? I’m not quite sure. Steven Spielberg was probably a film major. I don’t think he is into woman’s fashion. But you assumed I would know what you were talking about because apparently you have a presumptuous, overall idea of what a film major should be … which is the definition of a stereotype.
You then blatantly stereotype Notre Dame guys. You say that we are “nothing special in the looks department” (a euphemism for unattractive, ouch!), and assume that all Notre Dame men are guilty of making negative remarks about Notre Dame girls’ appearances. We all focus on “real or imagined physical faults” in females. Instead, we should “focus on the things that make Notre Dame girls awesome!”
Meghan, when I meet a girl, I usually focus on her as an individual. Since you tend to judge people as a group, however, I would love for you to enlighten me on the collective attributes that make Notre Dame girls “awesome!” In the spirit of being cliché, you cannot fight fire with fire. You cannot fight stereotypes with stereotypes.
And for the record, Meghan, I am male and attend Notre Dame, a “Notre Dame guy” if you will. And I am attractive.