If you have "no place to go," come here!


Missed this one at time. Doesn't April, 2009 seem like a long, long time ago?

Just adding to my incredibly superficial knowledge of feminist waves, here.

No votes yet


Historiann's picture
Submitted by Historiann on

Is your "blub" sarastic? (When Melissa at Shakesville uses the term, she means it to point to a post or story she found particuarly moving and/or optimistic about the triumph of feminist values.)

Walker is a total tool. She's like Katie Roiphe, a third-waver daughter of a famous second-waver whose whole writing career is built around dissing and dismissing second-wave feminism and their own mothers. Publishing houses can't wait to offer them book contracts for their neo-antifeminist tomes, because 1) they inherited a brand-name, and 2) they're repeating the ever-popular message that feminism is now either irrelevant or downright damaging.

As to Walker's linked article: it's just as fatuous and foolish as everything else she's ever written. (Confession of professional jealousy: my parents are obscure midwesterners, not celebrity writers, and my own professional and blog writing is all about how we very much need feminism, so you can write my resentment of the Roiphes and the Walkers off if you like. I suppose I could get a fat book contract if I levereged my academic career and blog "fame" to write a big antifeminist tome, but that ain't gonna happen.)

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

He's like Christmas and Hanukkah for women! Like, totally!

/channeling Naomi Wolf here, snarkily

Historiann's picture
Submitted by Historiann on

for the clarification.

Valhalla's picture
Submitted by Valhalla on


By April it was painfully clear that Michelle was committed to playing uber-Stepford wife. She's not any wave. And the "when Mama ain't happy" paragraph is pretty standard -- I'm pretty sure Bush made jokes about how Laura was really the boss. It's a sort of joking that's only funny because of how contra-gendered expectations it is, ha ha, the little woman is really in charge! yuk yuk, except we know it's not really true. It IS an improvement over, say, the 1950s. (except I think 50s comedians made the same kind of jokes).

Real respect for another person doesn't need irony.

Walker wants to think that Obama's style represents a real turning point. There's an argument to be made that even superficial changes (which is what Obama represents) can advance real change. And I can't say I miss the overt swaggering of the Bush/Reagan years. However, anyone who played patron saint for Progressive Dude Nation's particular brand of misogyny doesn't represent any real progress. Hell, half the time I prefer the straight-up sexism of various right-wing factions; at least you can fight that straight on.

If anything, what Walker has totally and utterly missed what is really going on: Obama no more represents a real change to a new definition of masculinity than he does a real change toward progressive politics.

michaelwb's picture
Submitted by michaelwb on

I love the first comment in that thread as well for vapid silliness:

I think Obama’s sense of self is profoundly influenced—and deepened—by his experience as a father…especially the dad of daughters.

And how'd that work with Bush & Cheney?

Seriously if just being a father of daughters alone made a difference, then patriarchy wouldn't have endgamed a long time ago.