What leads a law professor who describes herself as a feminist to do something like this?
See also Echidne of the Snakes.
–Ann Bartow
What leads a law professor who describes herself as a feminist to do something like this?
See also Echidne of the Snakes.
–Ann Bartow
Is this multiple choice? I’m going to take “A” — because she’s not really a feminist.
By the way, I also take Althouse to task on my blog for her unfounded attack last week against you and Belle. There was actually quite a bit more to say about that, but I wanted to keep the overall post concise.
Thanks. I saw your post and very much appreciate the support.
Wow, your old enemy Althouse looks like a complete fool.
I guess it’s lucky for her that she doesn’t know the meaning of the word “shame.”
Ann,
I have often disagreed with you, and on one or two occasions quite vehemently, but you said it well and succinctly.
I appreciate that, Auguste. Probably we will be back in disagreement when I say this, but I wish everybody’s breasts would drop out of the political discourse, including those appended to right wing women.
“What leads a law professor who describes herself as a feminist to do something like this?”
Ann Althouse: feminism as Glenn Reynolds: libertarianism.
I also agree with your last comment; Althouse’s appalling conduct should make it clear that attacking women based on their physicial characteristics and deep meanings that can allegedly be derived from them is odious, even if you disagree with their politics.
Some of the Supposedly Liberal Dudes aren’t likely to agree on that last point; I’ve very glad that you do.
Probably we will be back in disagreement when I say this, I wish everybody’s breasts would drop out of the political discourse, including those appended to right wing women.
No. I am coarse, and have defended coarseness repeatedly, but one thing I don’t do, and attempt to remain consistent on (it’s not impossible that I’ve slipped here and there, he said disclaimingly) is keeping it out of the realm of physical characteristics.
[It’s not impossible that I’m a little sexist in that stance, of course; I’m probably less diligent about avoiding the topic when it comes to men than I am when it comes to women. :)]
No one is perfect, and we all type things we regret, or at least rethink. But there are a lot of Supposedly Liberal Dudes out there who spend an inordinate amount of time and energy trashing right wing women in very sexist ways. “It’s okay because she is a Republican” just doesn’t cut it with me.
Obviously I mixed my cases or some other grammar-related term in that comment above – it should have been “one thing I do…is keep it out of.” I’m sure it confused no one, but I hate allowing errors like that to remain in the wind.
As for your SLD, on this we are in agreement. As the former proprietor of Malkin(s)watch, I know that a lot of our counterparts spend a lot of time trying to gin up ways in which ANY criticisms of right wing women can be forced into being sexism; still, I am often bothered (not always to the point of chastisement) by the devolution of threads into hotness-based sniping.
Any thread that follows a blog post in which a women had her gender leveraged against her will almost certainly “devolve” as you describe. I hesitate to pick a fight with any particular Supposedly Liberal Dude at the moment, so I’m not going to provide any links here, but any SLD post that mentions breasts or “slutiness” or “hotness” or lack thereof, or body size or body features or clothing choices will inspire (by design, I assume) a lot of sexist comments. I can e-mail you about a zillion examples if you have any trouble finding them yourself; this is a topic I have been researching and documenting.
You seem to think I’m still differing with you on this issue, but I’m not. I agree. Is there something specific that I said that leads you to think otherwise, so that I can clarify it?
Ann, as a friend of Auguste’s, I can assure you that while he loves to be mean to right wingers both male and female, he’s against trashing women on their looks, regardless.
Yikes, no I didn’t think you were disagreeing. I was just explaining my thoughts – I guess I slipped into pompous law professor mode inadvertently. Sorry about that. But I have seen both of you comment at satirical sites that trash women a lot, and/or link to them. I like satire and I think it can be done well without leveraging gender, but I often feel like not too many people share this view.
Last time I engaged a certain satirical website, I got scary bad hate e-mail and so did my law school administration, and this blog was almost shut down, so I admit I am quite wary.
Any defense I could offer about said links and comments would be wanky and self-involved, so I’ll skip it and say that, given that we’re talking about the incident I think we’re talking about, I don’t think I realized (or at least processed) that someone had taken it that far. Whoever did is awful.
There were a number of SLDs and their affiliates who felt I needed to be sent a message, and in part their bulllying succeeded, which is a story for another day. Anyway, you are welcome to comment here, and you are free to disagree and criticize as you feel is warranted.
Pingback: News for Greens » The “dirty pillow” line of attack
Pingback: Jon Swift
Supposedly Liberal Dudes. I must live in a cave; I had never heard that. Zing.
I agree that some of the things said about Althouse are just as bad as her comments. But I’m glad that Althouse has shown her true colors. Maybe her precious traffic meter will drop.
I stopped going there when she went ga-ga for Alito. Feminist, my foot.
“I stopped going there when she went ga-ga for Alito. Feminist, my foot.”
Right. To see someone who wrote an absurd, evidence free op-ed urging liberals to support the nomination of a radical opponent of women’s rights to the Supreme Court attack other people’s feminist credentials is remarkable. That the crimes against feminism in question seem to involve wearing an Ann-Taylor knitted top and having T-Shirt ads on your blog just makes it extra farcical.