Chuckles sent first this:
… which I made it part of the way through:
A Manual for Cleaning Women: Selected Stories
and then this:
… to which I replied at their site:
This is dishonest for a start. I had to do my own research on Lisa Ruddick, Angelika Bammer and Ruth-Ellen Boetcher Joeres, the latter associated with this:
Radical feminist and lesbian theory is passionate
… which is a bit of giveaway. It’s dishonest because readers of the article have no way of knowing they’re dealing with hardcore feminists in academia, an egregious bunch to be sure. I was always taught that one had to attach one’s bona fides and date articles in order for the reader to know where the author was coming from.
My own background is education and my last position tutor in English in Sicily, before that Professor of English in Russia, previously in the UK. I’ve been to US colleges on visits.
The current struggle on all campuses is the social justice lunacy imparted to students by global left academics and alumni – I’ve written copiously on it at two sites. It was something I personally came up against in faculty and what distressed me the most was the dishonesty.
Fine having irrational leftwing views but to impose them on students, allowing no chance of counterpoint or debate, betrays the whole purpose of colleges and the free dissemination of information. With the rise of Common Core and World Core Curriculum, plus IB, the situation has almost reached the state of irrecoverable.
And looking at the backgrounds of these three women, plus reading some of their work, all are deeply into the social justice warrior malaise. Suspicion was immediately aroused, alarm bells went off, when reading, above:
I’ve encountered two types of people who are having trouble adapting to the field. First, there are those who bridle at the left-political conformity of English …
Meaning political hijacking of language – I write on this topic primarily.
… and who voice complaints familiar from the culture wars. But a second group suffers from a malaise without a name; socialization to the discipline has left them with unaccountable feelings of confusion, inhibition and loss.
Unaccountable? We of the sane can account for it quite easily, it is that which has been engendered by just such people as the three named in this comment. My disadvantage is that I cannot post the 13,000 or so posts and the various works I’ve written on this matter in one comment, nor can I quote Camille Paglia in depth, nor Christina Hoff-Sommers.
There is nothing wrong with these three women associated with this article secreting themselves away in some room and debating all this – the only thing they must not do under any circumstances is drag starry-eyed students into it because then it becomes propaganda.
And thus we get things like this:
Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the most commonly diagnosed mental disorder among children in the US, is becoming even more commonly diagnosed, according to a new analysis of nationwide data.
Between 2003 and 2011, prevalence of the disorder in kids aged five to 17 rose from 8.4 percent to 12 percent, a 42.9 percent increase, researchers report … One striking trend that came out of the researchers’ analysis was a boost in ADHD diagnoses in girls.
Well, golly gosh, whodathunk it? The core cause can be summed up in one paragraph:
Christina Hoff-Sommers argues, in Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed Women, that feminist misandry leads directly to misogyny by what she calls “establishment feminists” against (the majority of) women who love men.
There are near countless other paragraphs in a similar vein.