Honestly, New York Times, this fan letter to Lawrence Summers is frankly embarrassing, even if it's "only" in the opinion section: The Right Leader for the Fed
No one is perfect, but I score Larry’s batting average and qualifications at the top of the heap. There’s that extraordinary intelligence: the most brilliant, most analytical and most surgical brain of anyone I’ve ever encountered.
Whoo, sports metaphors! Also, no one is perfect, but WHATEVER, let's get back to talking about how awesome Larry is! He's just so intelligent.
Now I know I'm an angry no-fun feminist and all, but I find it striking that Steven Rattner can't even be bothered to mention the other top contender for the post, Janet Yellen, in his panegyric to Summers. He doesn't have a word to say about what makes Summers a better candidate for the job than Yellen--he doesn't have anything to say about Yellen at all. But the language he uses to describe Summers's "extraordinary intelligence" is telling: "brilliant", "analytical", "surgical". Don't stop there, Mr. Rattner, let's do a little word association! I'll start: Precise. Cold. Hard. Scientific. Male. Do I win?
By implication, it's that "brilliant, analytical, surgical" intelligence that Yellen lacks. In a piece about how great Lawrence Summers is, who famously thinks that women have less intrinsic aptitude than men for science and engineering, that implication is a problematic one, to say the least.
Also, I am SO SURPRISED that Rattner found "working for [Summers]...to be stimulating, enjoyable and harmonious", and that he assumes this experience to be universal:
As near as I could tell, my thoroughly satisfying experience was similar to that of his other staffers. On reflection, I concluded that passing years, a searing experience as president of Harvard and some help from trusted aides had sanded down some rough edges.
In other words, as near as Rattner could be bothered to notice, or care about, the experience of anyone not himself, Summers is a great guy to work with! Since he apparently couldn't be bothered to actually ask any of those other people. And it's definitely not possible that he would fail to notice poor treatment of women, or people of color, or anyone without his and Summers's shared privileges, because everyone knows white dudes are totally objective observers of the world around them. It's like that old riddle--if sexism happens and a white dude doesn't notice it, was it really sexist? (A: Haha, NO, don't be silly!) Dude can't even talk about sexism--"a searing experience" at Harvard? Really? What the fuck kind of experience do you think it was for all the women harmed by his remarks, Mr. Rattner?
It's especially illuminating to read the above in relation to this piece, published in the same edition of the same paper, about some big-shot philosophy professor who left his tenured position after a student reported him for sexual harrassment. The article starts with the totally un-shocking revelation that philosophy is not a very friendly field for women:
In case it wasn't clear, "thinkers" today are still questioning whether women are fully capable of reason. Like Larry Summers. That's a problem, and apologists like Rattner are only adding to it.Thinkers from Aristotle to Kant questioned whether women were fully capable of reason. Today, many in the field say, gender bias and outright sexual harassment are endemic in philosophy, where women make up less than 20 percent of university faculty members, lower than in any other humanities field, and account for a tiny fraction of citations in top scholarly journals. [Emphasis mine.]
See also:
Paul Krugman: Sex, Money and Gravitas
Business Insider Australia: Elizabeth Warren Has Thrown Her Support Behind Janet Yellen For Fed Chair
No comments:
Post a Comment