The present issue includes a letter from Gail Weed taking issue with the use of an offensive sexist remark in the previous issue’s review of Fast Food Nation (“Supersize This,” 3/9). I had read the review in question and could not think of what the sexist remark was that was being referred to. So I pulled the relevant issue of the Washington City Paper out of the trash and looked it up.
In hindsight, I remember that upon reading the remark in question my reaction was that it was a pretty strong metaphor. There was a more subtle reaction, as well: a twang of discomfort. But, given that I was reading over lunch and didn’t have lots of time to spare, I ignored the twang and read on. After reading Gail Weed’s letter (The Mail, 3/16), I’m not happy that I so easily consumed that particular remark. I wish I’d been motivated at the time to spend a little time objecting to the use of a clever metaphor that in fact has very dark and hateful aspects and is a reflection of the ease in our society with which we are willing to demean women for our own gain. I hope the author of the review does a little thoughtful soul searching as to the reason why that particular metaphor was used.
So I feel bad I didn’t object more to myself and to the City Paper about the remark. And the wadded-up McDonald’s bag in the trash can next to my desk, evidence of the lunch I finished just before typing this letter, ain’t got me feeling too good about myself, either.