To be angry at Colleen McCullough's obituary

[drudgetrudy]

"Plain of feature and certainly overweight"-for a respected novelist and neuroscientist-Grrr!

Wow, that's disgusting!!!! What a sexist, nasty insult.

whos written that?

That's awful, how will her family feel reading that. I would certainly complain.

Absolutely disgusting

and I assume the deceased isn't male ...

Yanbu. But I didn't know she was a scientist.

You need to put it in context before anyone can really judge.

What context can make that any better?

Where is this written?

That is not even vaguely relevant in a list of someone's achievements in life. How rude.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/30/colleen-mcculloch-well-celebrate-a-woman-for-anything-as-long-as-its-not-her-talent

Awful. Disgusting.

www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/the-thorn-birds-author-colleen-mccullough-dies-on-norfolk-island/story-e6frg8n6-1227201243185?nk=70ac6eb40011ff2fdeb370d0b188849b

Those lines still render me incredulous when I read them - it's just incomprehensible that it was a) written b) not picked up in editing. Though I found the rest of the obituary very informative.

When you read the piece in the Guardian, thanks Clarty for the link, it really does come over as a misogynistic slapdown for Colleen.

I found this deeply upsetting.

That is shocking. Really don't know what to comment.

Well, it was a very stupid opening. And reflects on the writer rather than on his subject. But the rest of it was interesting and informative. She sounds an amazing lady.

is it going to be ammended though.

I'm completely taken aback by that article and the comparisons to the obits for male authors. It's actually insane that this kind of crap is still happening. The fact that the rest of the article is interesting doesn't excuse the appalling opening sentences.

I was surprised by the descriptions in the Australian's obit but then I read this in the Washington Post, “Get out and get a job as a mangle hand in a laundry,” she recalled her father telling her. “That’s all you’re good for — you’ll never get a husband, you’re too big and fat and ugly.”

So I wonder if the description was part of an ongoing self-deprecating joke she'd talk about on the Australian's part? Did she often describe herself that way? When she described her 8000 sq ft house as big like she was?

Not that it should have been the lead paragraph and the Guardian's commentary was on the mark.

I do remember reading The Thorn Birds as a young teen. I think I read it soon after Judy Bloom's Forever.

Those were good days.

May she RIP.

Surely you're just perpetuating the idea that women should be valued primarily for their looks if you get offended by a plain, overweight woman being described as a plain, overweight woman, non?

There is more to life than being pretty.

This made me really angry and also saddened that despite all her achievements the first thing that was mentioned was her appearance.
The word NEVERTHELESS really got to me-as if it was surprising that an overweight woman could be intelligent and witty.
Very sexist-you don't read comments that Churchill was a great leader despite being overweight.

Not that its relevant but the photo of her when she was younger shows someone with an attractive, strong, pleasant face anyway.
Just not meeting the approval of the gaze of the person writing this nasty article (dim of wit and devoid of sensibility!).

That's awful!!!

Gosh. I'm shocked. When did she pass away?

Her Masters of Rome series is brilliant, absolutely brilliant.