Are men necessary? by Maureen Dowd, the only female columnist at the New York Times, has become a media sensation, winning approval and criticism in equal measures. Despite being published in the US, it has produced ripples that have spread all the way across the Atlantic with nearly the same intensity. Newspapers and magazines have all dedicated full-page interviews to Dowd in the last week. She was already in the news two weeks before when she wrote a scathing column on Judith Miller, her own colleague at the New York Times, demanding her dismissal. Titled “Woman of mass destruction”, it lambasted Miller for being the mouthpiece of the Bush administration. The latter had written a series of articles insisting Iraq really did possess the ghostly weapons of mass destruction. But now the book has generated even more attention from the press.

At the centre of the book’s thesis is the argument that men tend to prefer the stereotypical bimbo types because they are afraid of successful women. Hence, women have to dumb down if they want to find a partner as men are immediately put off by a display of wit, intelligence and self-confidence. Add charm to the lot and you have the explosive mixture that pushes men to run into the arms of the next pretty airhead. This is a bold assertion at a time when there have never been more women in positions of power. In fact, the next American presidential election is being billed as the battle between Hilary Clinton and Condi Rice and Germany will end up with its first female Chancellor in Angela Merkel. Africa has also seen a woman elected as chief of state for the first time, the Liberian, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, a former World Bank economist. However, Dowd asserts that more women are being pushed to care more about botox injections because men are frightened by excessive braininess. As such, they have given up on the feminist struggle. Dowd, who called herself a post-feminist, says that she has been reconverted to old style feminism. She claims the modern version is pushing women to be sex objects.

<B>Feminism and post-feminism</B>

However, such a statement is bound to have repercussions. Another female writer countered with her own column; “Is Maureen Dowd Necessary?” The Wall Street Journal called the book a stinker. Other critics have lambasted the supposed hypocrisy at the heart of the book. If on the one hand, Dowd says that women have been reduced to stereotypes by men, she she keeps on doing the same thing in her own book, by claiming that women want to look like inflatable dolls. Furthermore, they claim that Dowd’s research is based on long discarded research, and that her conclusions come from her own experiences and those of a small clique of friends at the New York Times. These are highly successful women and thus do not reflect the reality of the lives of millions of other less privileged ones. Dowd, unmarried, has dated amongst others, actor Michael Douglas. In the words of one journalist; “Dowd’s whining about not having a husband because of feminism is a bit like listening to Republican Senator Trent Lott complain that he lost his second holiday home because of Hurricane Katrina…given the bigger canvas of suffering, neither one is too badly off.”

Despite the critics, some more scathing than is necessary, the book has achieved exactly what the author intended. Maureen Dowd said that she wanted to reopen the debate on feminism and this is exactly what has happened and she has to be admired for that. Even though some think the book lacks in substance, it has asked a fundamental question that too many have been happy to ignore; has feminism delivered equality? The answer is an emphatic no. The why is probably becoming less important these days, because there needs to be the recognition first that feminism failed to live up to women’s expectations. Just like the Civil Rights Movement did not deliver equality, or decolonisation freedom for Africa, so has feminism let its proponents down. Only when we accept this can we look at the reasons behind its shortcomings and how it can be rectified.

<B>llusions of equality</B>

Though many doors have been opened to women, many areas still remain restricted. Equality is just a façade that hides the gender barricade of the male dominated world. It cannot be denied that more women are being employed than before. Even in the most patriarchal countries, like Mauritius, women form a big proportion of the workforce compared to only 20 years ago. Many have even taken considerable positions at the top of the social ladder. In fact, some of the controversies surrounding the political purging in the public sector involved women holding high positions. In journalism, there are more female bylines. At the University of Mauritius, some of the most active and respected academics are women. In fact, all this is, of course, an illusion of equality. Women disproportionately occupy the low paid jobs. They are still expected to do the housework and rear children. In parliament, they are still a minority voice. Not only does this reflect the years of oppression, when they were denied education, but it shows the continued lack of equal opportunities. Many positions are still boys clubs where entrance depends on gender.

On this count, Maureen Dowd’s book can be said to lack substance. Equality cannot be achieved without economic equality. While men continue to hold the reins of power, both political and financial, women will continue to hang back and feed on illusions of success. Though some may become financially independent, and graduate to important positions, for the majority, it is a constant struggle to break down the gender barrier.

<B>Diren VALAYDEN</B> <I>Outlook Correspondent in Dublin</I>