(Originally published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch)
By LISA NUSS
02/18/2004
My first job in San Francisco after college and before law school was as a temporary receptionist for a large law firm. On my first day, I got a call from a demanding man who grew impatient as I looked for the extension of the attorney he was calling. After several seconds, he screamed into the phone, "Do you know who you're talking to?" He insisted that I read him the fourth name down from the top of the letterhead. Of course, it was his.
Headlines across the country have proclaimed shock that Martha Stewart was apparently rude to, yelled at and hung up on Douglas Faneuil, a broker's assistant at Merrill Lynch at least four times! To Mr. Faneuil - who complained, "I have never, ever been treated more rudely" - I say, welcome to my world.
The trivial incidents he recounted pale in comparison to what I've encountered from powerful men after 20 years of working in politics and law. In Washington, D.C., and on the West Coast from Seattle to San Francisco, I have seen men who are pillars of their community throw chairs, scream, belittle and demean people, including me, on a regular basis.
I don't defend this behavior. I'm just saying it happens. And I'm asking why what is common behavior by (some) powerful men merits salacious news stories when it comes from a woman? So what if Stewart was demanding? She has to be one of Merrill Lynch's premier clients; they also manage her corporation's pension fund. I've put up with all manner of callous rudeness from powerful male clients because higher-ups expect us to treat plum clients with kid gloves.
Could you imagine a newspaper article criticizing Donald Trump because one young woman was offended that Trump was curt and demanding to her? Sounds trivial, doesn't it?
Feminists disagree about the solution to this double standard. Some argue that it's not progress to sink to the level of men. I tend to be guided by the principle of "What's good for the goose is good for the gander."
I worry about the undercurrent of vengeance in the attacks on Stewart. Sure, as a public figure, Stewart's stilted persona is fair fodder for NBC's "Saturday Night Live" skits, and her perfection-oriented household designs make for good parody. But the public flogging of Stewart has become so base, it's as if we can't wait to kick her to the curb.
A feature about Stewart on the Salon Web site justified its harsh tone with examples of bad her behavior that still pale in comparison to powerful men. In his book "Martha, Inc.," Christopher Byron declares Stewart shockingly ruthless, because when her husband became ill on a trip to South America she did some sightseeing instead of sitting next to his bed the entire time.
I would be violating some confidences if I detailed the way I've seen some powerful men treat their wives, but I can tell you none would ever be expected to chain themselves to their wives' sickbeds.
A profile in Vanity Fair described Stewart as a polarizing figure, ". . . (a) reassuring and maternal presence to some, a disturbing and negative force to others." Those are the only choices? That statement actually says more about the limited roles we expect women to stick to and our reaction when they don't.
The day that Stewart's company went public, she rang the opening bell for trading at the New York Stock Exchange. It was a powerful image and confirmed her status as a brilliant entrepreneur who had reached the pinnacle of money and power in this country.
Stewart never would have been so successful if she had confined herself to behaviors approved by society for women. I wonder if that's why we're now punishing her.
E-mail: lisanuss@msn.com
Lisa Nuss is a lawyer and freelance writer living in Mill Valley, Calif.
Comments