The best way to make stereotypes untenable for future use is to show how laughable they are. Whether it's a sexist, racist, homophobic or whatever stereotype, the more people that can be converted to the side of "can't take it seriously", the smaller the audience for the genuine poison.
You may want to consider
that not everyone has the same sense of humor as you.
I do not see the humor in this story you see.
True, and there is always a danger with parody that it can be taken seriously. The ones that keep you guessing are sometimes funniest, but also prone to being celebrated by some of the intended targets. (Mind you, it's not just the subtle ones that get some odd readings. The
CAP review of Team America: World Police laments the blasphemy in an "anti-left" film; didn't they notice that it was anti-everyone? (Warning: site design may harm sensitive eyes.))
Stereotypes are kept alive
by those who use them.
Stop using them and
people will forget them;
eventually.
As one author, the author of this story could have written something else, and one fewer story employing chick-lit stereotypes would exist. Hundreds of others are still being written. Net result: almost no change. Or, as one author, she could write a story lampooning the stereotype that makes a number of readers uncomfortable or amused. Either way, when reading future stories, proof-reading them, or writing them, those people might pause and think "This is starting to sound like
Aliens Want Our Women -- that's not good." Net result: slight reduction in the tolerance of the stereotype amongst writers, publishers and readers.
It can only do harm if the parody fuels the market for serious use of the stereotype. It's possible but, in this case, unlikely.
It is not the stereotype
you want to highlight
but the ignorance of the person
who employs them.
Sadly, this kind of patronizing portrayal of women is most often written by women, for consumption (in the tens of thousands of copies, good sales figures for the UK market) by women. As a man, I'm comfortable ridiculing the stereotype but not claiming a superior understanding of women's feelings and actions than the authors.
In chick-lit's defence, few of the writers or readers probably think of it as anything other than lightweight fluff to while away a few holiday hours on the beach or plane. Still, it's pretty depressing. It reminds me of the most disparaging conclusion to a book review I've ever read: "If you only read one book this year, this is probably the book that you'll read."
The end does not
justify the means.
Agree?
Depends on the end, depends on the means.