About the author

Jim Doyle

<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="4408 http://www.genderratic.com/?p=4408">49 comments</span>

  • OMG! There’s nothing here to spur my mind into action. How am I supposed to know what to say?

    Give me a blank slate to write upon and I will become a blank slate.

    😉

  • I have a question about the recent Eliot Rodgers fiasco – why the slavish devotion to connect him to the MHRM? Do you think it has something to do with a passing connection to Valerie Solanas and a need to project past failures of feminists onto people they don’t like?

  • Recently, thanks to following the anthropologist David Graeber on twitter, I observed the drama which later was dubbed #Jacobinghazi.

    Very briefly, a feminist writer in the (pretty far) left academic magazine Jacobin had written a post about how stats-heavy argumentation shouldn’t be dismissed as a “bro” thing and left to men only. Pretty reasonable in my opinion. She also commented that she didn’t much care for that condescending diminutive “bro”, and certainly it was inappropriate to use in connection with serious issues like rape threats.

    While saying the last part, she linked to a twitter post by the journalist Sarah Kendzior, who had did just that, talking about receiving threats from “brocialists”.

    Big mistake.

    See, Sarah Kendzior is the victim here – the victim of threats, so far – and a social justice warrior if there ever was one. And for a SJW, the first rule is: the victim’s experience must NEVER be questioned. She immediately decided that this linking was malicious, and motivated out of a desire to belittle the seriousness of the threats she received. Some people unfamiliar with that SJW rule said the obvious thing: Uh, she wasn’t belittling your experience, she was complaining that YOU were belittling your own experience by using the “bro” diminuitive.

    Naturally, Kendzior saw this as someone maliciously trying to reinterpret her victimhood experience for her. And before the drama was over, she had reinterpreted a dozen other people in rather spectacularly creative ways, interpreting herself as a helpless victim of everyone who had ever disagreed with Sarah Kendzior. It’s summed up in somewhat 4-chan style here:

    http://imgur.com/a/nUX1A

    … and in a more serious investigative/polite manner here:

    https://storify.com/nkallen/a-spiral-of-confusion/

    For me it was pretty depressing to see how many people actually fell for such utterly transparent use of the victim card. Further depressing is that every single person commenting on this took for granted that Kendzior really did receive threats (which would be fair enough to assume in itself) and that these threats were from men. As if it was utterly impossible for a woman to write an anonymous threat. Most also took for granted (on victim status privilege alone) that they were from Jacobin writers as Kendzior hinted at.

    But anyway, from that mess, quite by coincidence, I came across the science fiction writer Will Farrally, who’s written a book on online social justice earriors. I was so impressed with his insight into these sort of dramas that I bought his book and spent the rest of the evenring reading it. I heartily recommend that one, but this post already has two links, so I recommend googling it!

  • Harald, welcome back! I think you’ve been here before; if not, then welcome!

    That’s a very interesting story and it tells a lot about the dynamics among feminists in general They are personal and social, not really ideological, and their disagreements tend to be personal rather than ideological.

  • “– why the slavish devotion to connect him to the MHRM? ”

    What you suggest, but not just that. There has been a running narrative that MRAs are violent – it’s the standard tradcon gender narrative these SJWs swear they are trying to dismantle. tacking Rodgers onto the MHRM serves that narrative.

    And it couldn’t be more necessary at the moment, in the wake of the big red video going viral, and the upcoming hideous glare that is going to be turned on the feminist effort to get the conference in Detroit cancelled. The Detroit police are getting involved in investigating the death threats, and that however that comes out the publicity for Feminism Inc will be horrible.

  • Thanks Gingko, yes, I’ve been here before, also under my not terribly secret pseudonym.

    You say it’s personal and not ideological, but the “the personal is political” is the rallying cry, after all…

    This is a particular brand of feminist. Half the people in this drama are after all willing to say no, you don’t get to misrepresent people just because you are a victim. The interesting thing is actually just that, that there is an ideological difference between identity-oriented feminists a.k.a. social justice warriors and the socialist feminists associated with Jacobin.

  • “You say it’s personal and not ideological, but the “the personal is political” is the rallying cry, after all…”

    They made their pigsty, they can lie in it.

    “The interesting thing is actually just that, that there is an ideological difference between identity-oriented feminists a.k.a. social justice warriors and the socialist feminists associated with Jacobin.”

    Ah. You are right.

    I saw an article form 1981 in some Socialist magazine in the US that identified the gender identity elements of feminism as anti-Marxist basically. I wish I could find it.

  • Jesus Christ, that JenniferP is a disgusting human being. I genuinely wonder how many men like me have killed themselves because of vermin like that.

    I’ve said it before and doubtless will again: Even if “misandry” wasn’t part of my vocabulary, I’d still consider feminism my implacably hostile enemy as an autistic man. I have more respect for the kids who bullied me in school for being a freak than I do for most feminists, at this point; feminism shares all their vices and none of their meager virtues.

  • What a pit of self-righteous, entitled princesses that comment thread is.

    JP is a piece of filth, and that man is a victim of women like her.

  • Actual concern for women’s feelings seems like blood in the water to an awfully large number of feminists. As soon as a guy lets on that he cares what feminists think a ending frenzy breaks out and he is quickly torn to shreds. That, at least, is what I have been seeing all over the place through things like twitter and tumblr.

    This does not seem like the sort of selection pressure that is going to do feminism any kind of favours over the long term. Ah well, it’s nothing to do with me (uncaring lout ftw), but it is still sad to see genuinely nice people being harassed like that.

  • My god, JenniferP and her cult are a bunch of insensitive twats! Shaming a man who has anxiety disorder, making him feel like a jerk for asking a serious question, generally getting high and mighty in addition to snobby and stuck-up because “Oh my god, what about that manz!”

    It would’ve been better if the man hadn’t asked for advice from the likes of her in the first place. That’s only going to make his anxiety skyrocket and possibly lead to harming himself (if he hadn’t done so already).

    Instead, he should just rely on the people in his life who care about him (family, friends, connections) and therapists. Stay away from people like JenniferP and her co-horts, do not seek advice from them. They are unqualified, ignorant bigoted extremists who get their jollies up by making men like him grovel at their feet. Let them rot in their little hive while he makes a success out of himself. That’ll show them and others of their ilk.

    Sorry for the rant.

  • That thread is an awesome read! Basically a guy who recognises he has social anxiety issues, and wants to resolve them, tries to ask advice from a forum full of people who don’t even realise that they also have social anxiety issues.

    Hilarity ensues.

  • Sans-sanity,
    “Actual concern for women’s feelings seems like blood in the water to an awfully large number of feminists.”

    Until the last shred of chivalry is beaten out of the culture with ridicule and denunciation, no Anglophone man can really trust any feeling of concerns for women’s feelings – he should examine them, each one, the way a person wary of saying something racist should be vigilant.

    That’s the virtuous thing to do. Also, it protects him against these psychic predators.

  • you see that sort of shit all the time with SJWs. It’s not the neo-nazi or the actual misogynist who earns their ire, it’s the “ally” Time and time again, I’ve seen them sitting there, waiting for just one little slip up to occur so they can prance in and “call-out” and get their fix of self-righteous indignation.

    It’s pretty self-defeating, but the fact is these people get off on their own perceived oppression. Any hint of having that taken away burns like acid.

  • Gingko, you may be referring to Michael Tomasky’s “Left for Dead”? It was serialized in the Village Voice (I think?) and probably other places too. That was 1996 though, and its dated now re: gender politics. He was sharply critical of identity politics as postmodern gobbledygook.

    Will Shetterly is probably the only person going this route now, arguing that identity politics have eclipsed actual progressive politics (defined as class politics): http://shetterly.blogspot.com/ He’s been called racist, sexist and everything else for holding fast to this, and this means you can trust him to say the stuff no one else will.

  • As usual, something involving marijuana going terribly wrong…also involves alcohol. But no one blames the alcohol.

  • “(((passes peace pipe to Gingko)))”

    Not bad. Where’d you get it? j/k. I can’t do that stuff and keep my job.

    DDH, you are about the only person I know with the historical perspective to address this: how much did identity politics deform the left, and how much feminism? And do you think it started in the aftermath of the CRM, first as a tactically useful and obvious matter that latter evolved into a bunch of nationalist, mystical woo – melanism and all that?

    Do you see parallels between the development of black nationalism and feminism, and what do you think of the catch phrase “women and minorities”?

  • Will, I’m glad I went. You’ll be a regular stop from now on.

    Daisy,
    “Tumblr is turning me into some kind of weird anti-SJW malcontent,”

    Anyone interested in actual social justice is going to have very little patience with that air-tight little claque of fashionable posers. Keep it up.

    Do you ever look in on Sir you Are Being Mocked on Tumblr? He is worth the time. Just-Smith is too.

    ” and I was doing it before anybody on my block, too.”

    And paid the price, too.

  • http://goodmenproject.com/feat…..nt-1545182

    An article saying men who are for Women’s Rights only do it to impress someone and lure women.

    Here’s my comment. I actually did it different this time.

    “I went out on a date. Was very promising as images of good-will and understanding danced merrily in my mind.

    It didn’t end well. First time was we disagreed on a very touchy subject, leading to the relationship put to pasture on my own decision.

    Oh we had a great time at first. She promised that if there ever was a cold shoulder to cry on, they’d be there to provide good comfort and whatever concerns I have they’ll be heard.

    Imagine how heartbroken I felt when I told them about the negative experiences I had garnered at the hands of both genders in my youth. A return trip to the past costs me a lot, particularly if I choose to highlight landmarks in detail and the frustrations at getting anyone to imagine that girls and women were capable of harm.

    In the end, I felt good and awaited her counseling and the reveal of the heart she venerated.

    Alas, to no avail. My date told me, flat out, that even though they were sorry for the disgusting behavior of the girls and women, in the end it didn’t matter. According to her philosophy, since I was a straight white male, I enjoyed the privileges of a system that oppresses women all around the world. The male powers that be have ensured their collective fortune trickles down from above into the palm of my hands like a waterfall of Reaganomics. Besides, she added, I was an anomaly as what happens to women and girls is worse, more of a priority. She even threw the very statistics at me that the OP used in this article as clean-cut evidence. “Sorry, Eagle. You’re a great guy with a fine attitude. Nobody deserves what you went through. But you’ve got to have priorities. You understand, right?.”

    “Yes.” I said, keeping my sadness concealed, disappointment in check lest I come off as entitled to her. Funny, I thought, that she only said this when I brought up what the females did to me.

    This plagued me long after the courtship failed. But being the open-minded individual I was, I decided to delve further into this. Maybe I wasn’t understanding her. After all, she still possessed this caring, compassionate side, which has lead to some progressive milestones. Maybe the date failed because I didn’t understand, wasn’t schooled enough.

    So I made it my mission to arm myself with knowledge so that maybe we could give it another chance. She called me up the following day and said “Please don’t take offense, Eagle. I’m so sorry, that side of me wasn’t true. Let’s try again.”

    “Sure.” I replied “But I need time to find out more about you. You don’t mind, do you?”

    “Of course” she cheered, “Yes, that’s what I always say. Go, learn, don’t believe the biased Republicans or misogynists. Call me up later when you’re done and then we’ll set a date for another outing.”

    “Deal.” I went, hanging up the phone.

    So I made it my mission to find out more and what emerged did seem the better picture: Equal rights, sympathy, progress for everyone. Heck, I even found some areas that appeared compatible with my views. In all this emerged a re-construction of her into the perfect date material as it had been the first time we met.

    Until I came across the unsavory element that brought my hopes crashing down to earth with a thud.

    First there was Mary Koss and her erasure of Male Victims of female sexual abuse; the existence of an entire population of individuals wiped out at the stroke of a pen from statistical records because it wouldn’t be appropriate to call what happened “Rape”. They were saddled with the label “Sexual Assault”, sloppy seconds as opposed to the main course meal.

    I choked. This was hard to believe after the unconditional semaritism touted.

    Pulling up the rock revealed the red ants nest in full: Male victims of Domestic Violence left out based on The Duluth Model of Domestic Violence that forever labels them primary aggressors automatically arrested should they endure physical and psychological abuse from their spouses. She lobbied for it into law without a second thought and no consideration of the consequences.

    Boys and girls in education struggling equally to keep up with the curriculum. She lobbied for the school system and educators to alter it and create programs designed specifically for girls only. Boys were left by the wayside. I couldn’t fathom the reasoning behind it when I later found out that the research showing both genders having trouble was right there before her eyes. And she went ahead with her advocacy anyway then patted herself on the back for a job well done..

    Shared Parenting was being considered as an option to address the disparity in family courts where fathers had less of a chance to stay in their kids lives even if they drained themselves mentally and financially to prove otherwise. 50/50 parenting, null and void if sufficient, viable evidence were found that either the father or mother were detrimental to the child’s well-being. She opposed this and claimed that this would allow abusive fathers access to their kids. Shared Parenting came and went with no supporters.

    Woah! Unbelievable! My throat was parched, dry. This would be my date again?

    Out of stubbornness and chivalry, but no less cynical, I called her up and gave her my support while thinking “Just don’t go too deep. Have fun, be considerate, caring. Remember, you still agree with some of her points.”

    We were out on our second date. We got to chatting up and it looked like the tension had evaporated.

    I should’ve known better when she broached the subject of Boko Harem. That’s when her other side fell out again. She let it hang with glee, going on about what they did typified the “War on Women” being waged on our doorstep. “My heart bleeds for those schoolgirls. It just goes to show that Misogyny knows no cultural bounds.” She ranted and raved.

    A part of me was reviled. It knocked on wood, seered my nerves in order to get me talking. I don’t know, but I couldn’t let her opinions pass as gosiple again. “Um, Boko Harem also shot and killed innocent school boys as well. In fact, a recent news article mentioned their raid on a village. They signaled out the male babies, boys, and men then shot them on site. The body count was 300 – 400 plus.”

    She glared at me, eyes burning. “Firstly, the schoolboys were dead anyway. There was nothing to be done. You can’t help the dead. Same with those males in the village. Now if they had kidnapped or raped the women, girls and female babies then there’s a difference. Again, priorities, Eagle, priorities.”

    I said nothing save for a atonal, weak-kneed “I get it.” to concede.

    We talked some more and finally, the subject of Elliot Rodgers came up. “Oh my god, that was horrible. Just horrible. Killing all those women, believing he’s entitled to sex from them as if everyone of them should just make themselves available to be taken. Did you read that manifesto of his? I did and it took all my power not to throw up. I’m so glad he killed himself but it’s just another example of misogyny and the problem of male entitlement. Did you also know that he’s linked to Men’s Rights Advocacy? It’s true. The media says so. I found out he hangs with those disgusting PUAs online. Yup, Mens Rights, always bleating on about how men have it bad. Ha, well if they’re like Elliot Rodgers, it’s all just a front to enforce their entitlement on all women. I’m just thankful there’s a petition out for the White House to declare them terrorists. Good riddance. You should sign it. I did and it felt good, like doing something for the justice and rights of women everywhere.”

    That did it. What I saw in front of me was hard to stomach and it filled me with rage. With the comfort of cynicism to catch my fall, I decided to take the plunge.

    “First, there is no evidence that PUAs are linked to Mens Rights Advocates in spite of what the media present. Second, Elliot Rodgers also hated Alpha Males, his brother, parents, humanity, and himself. He killed four men in addition to two women, intended to add a sorority house to his portfolio because Blonde Women were a preference he was especially frustrated with being rejected by, went on a drive-by injuring others of both genders including law enforcement officers and even spared the life of a woman at gunpoint before killing himself in the end. So it wasn’t solely Misogyny that motivated him. Third, I will never EVER sign a petition for the White House to label ANYONE terrorists just because I disagree with some of their points. I haven’t done it to you so you’d think some example following were extended in the name of equality, right?” I argued with a forceful tone that amazed even myself.

    She was rendered speechless on the spot. We didn’t say anything further all the way to the end of our date.

    To wrap it up in a bow, I called her on my phone at home. This time, it was my turn to break it off. “Listen, I have done the research and you accomplished some good things. You’ll get no argument from me otherwise. But, in the end, I also read about actions you took that went against everything you told me you stood for. Based on them, I can say with confidence that this relationship will never work out. Thank you, but we’re not compatible nor will we ever be. You take care of yourself. Good-bye.”

    I hung up and breathed in. It was futile in the end, but I learned something about myself that will stay with me to the end in the name of not just equality but simple human decency and dignity.

    What was the girl’s name? Well…you should know by now. I’ll leave it to you.”

    I noticed just now there was a contradiction and added it was HER who put the relationship out to pasture the first time. Not me.

  • Eagle, thanks for posting that here. I would elevate it to a post of its own but ballgame has done that already at FC.

    If it hasn’t been posted at Mensrights reddit, I will post it there as a reference article or people. it captures a whole lot.

  • If you’d like, Ginko. But don’t mention my handle. I already post there on the subreddit. Just say “Here’s a commentator in The Good Men Project thread laying out his concerns.”

    To be safe, I’ll let others do the talking. Let it speak for itself.

  • Daisy, whooee on that first one! Where do you find this stuff? It nails it!

    “While analysis and theory were historically produced by radicals in the context of struggle, this task has largely been shifted into the realm of academia”

    Hahahahahaha. These self-styled Maoists talking about “speaking bitterness” turned their revolution over to the Stinking Ninth category – because that’s what a lot of them were themselves.

  • Daisy,

    Identity Politics are divisions. There is only one single social justice issue in the world: economic. Everything our “revival” of “Social Justice” entails aligns seemingly perfectly with an overclass who desire to keep the underclass fighting amongst themselves; further, the entire context and actual goals align to “selling you shit” and thinly veiled “bootstraps” philosophy by focusing on issues like the wage gap, which doesn’t help anyone at the bottom of the barrel.

    It’s this insistence on the absolute morality of claims versus the reality that this changes absolutely nothing. We’re all still suffering and fighting to get by. People want to reduce to identity, when we should be expanding to “humanity”.

    At the end of the day, it’s how the owners convince the activists to do their dirty work for them. “Social Justice Warriors: Making things better for the upper class since 1999”. Want to talk postmodern Foucault? how about we talk about how every discourse on social justice has been coopted by one established power base or another leading us to here where Foucault would be rolling in his grave at the sheer idiocy inherent in forgetting that as soon as you’re part of the status-quo, you’re part of the status-quo. That’s the whole goddamn point of History of Sexuality: that discourses change and are the result of power dynamics. Orthodoxy is the death of discourse. This explains why there’s such a desire to uphold the “man’s side” of tradcon as they’re needing of that stoicism and workhorse role to maintain that power and position as “status-quo”.

  • Crow, I totally agree with you.

    Identity politics was fun for awhile, but whoever expected it to take over the entire show?

    Some of us (back in the day) thought identity politics would make us more effective overall; we thought we would relate to each other better and stuff. You know? Make us more aware of each other and nicer. It wasn’t supposed to supplant “the real struggle”…

    (sigh)

  • DDH,
    “Sorry you and Clarence weren’t allowed to argue on Feminist Critics. THIS GUY sure called it right: http://www.feministcritics.org/blog/2014/06/25/eagle3x-and-the-relationship-that-wasnt-rp/#comment-884839

    Clarence and I aren’t going to argue on FC or anywhere else because you can’t have an argument by yourself and that’s all he will have. When we agree, we talk, but I am not going to rise to the bait any more, ever again. It’s a waste of energy.

    But hey, you’re the exact person to ask about this – he was calling me out on banging on white feminists all the time and “white womenTM”. I agreed with him that I do that, caveating which white women – upper middle class, college-educated damsels – I criticize as opportunistic and dishonest parasites. You have extensive experience with this and are almost uniquely positioned to give a thorough analysis of the class issues in white feminism. WOCs have been talking about elite white feminists’ self-serving agenda for decades but I don’t think there is anything like that depth of discussion WRT to working class white women.

    I also think this blind spot in elite white feminism drives a lot of white women away from feminism as they find it .

    And I think this blind spot is a poisoned fruit of the identity politics you are decrying:
    “Identity politics was fun for awhile, but whoever expected it to take over the entire show?”

    THISTHISTHIS.

    When you have an identity politics that characterizes white people as privileged, you just erase huge swathes of the white population. But who cares if the cool kids get to feel virtuous about themselves, right?

    BTW, this identity politics ate the Left in the Anglosphere. it made some sense in the context of the American racial caste system, but even then it was inadequate and provisional. Why did it come to dominate the entire discussion? Because it was framed as a moral crusade, informed by leadership that had either come out of seminaries themselves or else who framed their arguments in Old Testament justice formulations, and that was very, very congenial to the sensibilities of a society with a Calvinist moral structure..

  • Hey look, my comment is in moderation! From now on, let no one here wonder why their comment has gone into moderation. There is no sense at all to it, so the question is idle.

  • Well, its interesting you say that, since virtually all of these people (on Tumblr anyway) identify as atheists. They therefore believe they are immune to puritanism. Ha!

    In addition, they are totally religiously-illiterate, and so when you accuse them of “Calvinism” (which is dead-on accurate), they have no knowledge of that whatsoever, they do NOT understand what you have just called them. They think it is a variation of puritan, they DO NOT know what the concept of “the elect” is. And so they obviously can’t be guilty of it.

    Our culture is shot through with Christianity, and nonChristians do not understand that they have been socialized by it too. Disagreeable atheists like Lawrence Krauss actually go around saying that religion is not something worthy of study, even if it has its stamp on most of humanity, psychology and culture. As a result, you have tons of ‘fauxgresssives’ with absolutely no knowledge of religious history or moralism, so they do not understand that they keep re-inventing the damn wheel.

    These schisms repeat in every group, on the Right AND the Left.. and certainly within identity-politics. There is always fundamentalism and puritanism (not the same thing at all), Calvinist tendencies to identify your distinct ideological-strand as “the elect”, and holy war on the Infidels. Over and over and over… all while they think they are pure and untouched by patriarchy or mass culture or whatever their particular “baddie” is.

    I am interested in analysis, ideas, etc… but I am no longer interested in who is the Elect, although I used to find the question riveting. After I left Christianity, boom… I was NO LONGER a fan of the whole “Elect” concept… and I suddenly realized where it came from! Duh!

    Yes, I don’t like the whole “white feminists” meme, since I have never said the things the “white feminists” are supposed to have said. But yeah, I have seen them say DUMB SHIT a lot, so I know why the WOC say that. If I was non-white, I’d likely say it too, since it DOES come from the Amanda Marcotte faction. And what is strange: they never seem to learn. This is because they LEAVE feminism (unless they are Marcotte-style careerists) in a huff, when they realize it really and truly is for **ALL** women…and the new crop of white women comes in, to say the clueless shit the last crop just said. Really. And this keeps happening. There is a revolving door of online-feminists. Once they realize feminism might actually include people they don’t like (I just got in a fight over the sex workers, for example, AGAIN) (Yeesh!) then they get bored or disillusioned and log off and go back to the clubs, or wherever it is they came from… and a new group of women’s studies-college-grads takes their place. They think they are radical since they have heard of Andrea Dworkin. But just say, “sex worker” or “Palestinian” or something scary like that, and they are out the door.

    Me and Clarence last argued over (guess what?) Trayvon Martin. I haven’t heard from him since, which is too bad, since I enjoyed the jousting. He made at least one point (about Adam and Eve, interestingly enough!) that I honestly never thought of before, so I am in his debt for that, at least.
    (the point: only when Adam ate, did God consider it disobedience… Eve got a pass, or maybe God was waiting to see if Adam would go along? Good point about lack of female moral agency, its even Biblical!)

  • DDH,
    “Yes, I don’t like the whole “white feminists” meme, since I have never said the things the “white feminists” are supposed to have said…”

    Like you said one time, being white is not enough to ensure you get white privilege. In your case being white didn’t make you a “white feminists”; you were just a feminist who was white.

  • I picked up a copy of bell hooks’ Feminist Theory since I’ve seen her name come up repeatedly. I’m only about halfway through, but I feel like I’ve seen what I needed to see.

    Her own criticisms of “white feminism” are pretty biting, and I have to say it sounds applicable even now, thirty years later. She notes the dogmatism in feminism, the hostility toward men, the lack of definition for the word “feminism”, and so on. I would find her recommendable for that, at least. Hey, she can’t be dismissed as easily as dissident feminists are.

    However, this book also establishes her very clearly as a “Patriarchy Hurts Men Too” feminist. It’s kind of funny how some of the issues she has as a black woman relating to white feminists sound a lot like non-feminist men relating to feminists, yet it’s not apparent whether the parallel occurred to her. I mean, I realize explicating that would not go over well today, let alone the mid-eighties, but it still falls short of inspiring.* Oh yeah, and she totally quotes Carol Hanisch’s “Men’s Liberation” with some approval, to the end of suggesting that men do not need or should not have a movement outside feminism. It seems like she basically just wants to recruit men to be feminist foot soldiers who possess no intellectual autonomy.

    I also have a copy of Millett’s Sexual Politics, which I haven’t read. Good god, she devotes as many pages (60ish) to D.H. Lawrence as she does to the eponymous subject of the book! This is not promising.

    *It reminds me of FC’s Daran once categorizing his interactions with Tigtog of finallyfeminism101 as a “win” insofar as receiving basic courtesy from e-feminists is a coup.

  • Welcome and thank you, log!

    Your comment raises a very important point , so important that I have raised it to a post. Thank you. The Genderratic community thanks you.

By Jim Doyle

Events

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssyoutubeby feather

Support Hannah Wallen’s HBR Talk

Categories

Archives

Tags