June 22, 2007 5:19 PM

Why we'll always have Paris
Posted by Diane Danielsonat 5:19 PM

Naomi Wolf looks into the "damsels in distress" appeal of Paris, Lindsey, Britney, Anna Nicole and even Princess Diana in the Washington Post earlier this week. 

Most American women are becoming ever more comfortable with their capabilities as they break into new professional roles, learn how to do electrical wiring or automobile maintenance, tackle life insurance, IRAs and tax planning on behalf of the many configurations of family they are nurturing, or even put their lives on the line as warriors in Iraq. They are surprising themselves and the culture every day by not falling apart as they take on tasks that the prefeminist world was sure would lead them to collapse in a heap, needing smelling salts.

Yet at the same time, the culture seems increasingly obsessed with showcasing images of glamorous young women who are falling apart -- sometimes seriously, even fatally.

In contrast to the women above (or girls, might be a more accurate moniker), she cites Queen Latifah and even Anne Hathaway as women who are doing it all and giving back.  So, why do a self-proclaimed Queen and an on-screen Princess manage to stay above the fray?  I was curious as to their role models and education - as those listed above, despite having some talents, didn't have much of either.

Turns out Anne went to NYU and according to Wikipedia "She referred to her college enrollment as one of her best decisions because she enjoyed being with others who were trying to successfully "grow up".   

Queen Latifah didn't go to college, but seemed to have a strong role model in her mother Rita Owens who stretched the family finances to get Queen (then Dana Owens) into a good parochial school with drama and sports programs, and supported her career.

As Wolf points out, it does seem strange that we worship the weak and distraught, when there are so many women of substance out there who should be celebrated.