Femmostroppo Reader – December 17, 2009

Items of interest found recently in my RSS feed. What did I miss? Please share what you've been reading (and writing!) in the comments.

Disclaimer/SotBO: a link here is not necessarily an endorsement of all opinions of the post author(s) either in the particular post or of their writing in general.

Categories: linkfest

Tags: ,

11 replies

  1. Jeremy’s criticism of right-wingers is the same in form to the conservative criticism of feminists – ‘something bad just happened, why don’t I see any [insert blanket term for group of people here] criticising this? This lack of an immediate response illustrates that [insert blanket term for group of people here] are hypocrites!’
    I expect that Catallaxy might have written something about it now were it not for the fact that their site seems to have disappeared into a howling internet vortex.

  2. http://andrewnorton.info/2009/12/16/should-the-whole-censorship-regime-be-relaxed/
    Clearly right-wingers have remained silent on the issue apart from the right-wingers that have not!

  3. We wrote a corporate condemnation as well, on behalf of the whole blog. We even managed to wheel out F.A. Hayek… (a classic rightie).

  4. Hmm, Crikey seems to be down (what is it with sites starting with “C”?) but I checked in my feed reader and my memory is not cheating me: since Jeremy’s piece was on the blog Pure Poison, which is devoted to lobbing coconuts at MSM columnists of a particular partisan slant, and references articles by Bolta and by journos on The Punch, isn’t it a fair bet that he’s talking about the same stable of knee-jerk Rudd-bashing* columnists as Pure Poison usually talks about? So while right wing blogs are one thing, they’re not the thing that Jeremy is talking about.
    *Nuanced Rudd-bashing is quite another matter.

  5. Yes, I think Jeremy’s showing his own lack of nuance.
    It’s a bit rich to interpret Bolt’s and Akerman’s silence on Conroy’s internet policy as something bad if it’s a policy they either agree with, or simply think is not particularly important. They can either be consistent or hypocritical, but not both.
    As TimT said, Jeremy’s a master of conspicuous indignation.

  6. This recent from xkcd translates beautifully to Dudez who come onto feminist websites with Fresh Manly Wisdom:

  7. Sorry, Orlando, are you trying to make out that either TimT or I are ignorant about either Bolt and Akerman, the clean feed, or what Jeremy’s trying to argue?

  8. I suspect that orlando is just dropping a general femmostroppo link as solicited in the post, Liam.

  9. God—you’re right, I’m still drinking my coffee and forgot it was the open thread.
    I’m sorry Orlando and other readers, please forgive my habitual punchiness.

  10. Back to Bolta/Albrechtsen/Akerman/Devine etc: I just checked my feedreader for the opinion section titles from yesterday and today in the News Ltd stable, and I can’t see a single piece addressing the internet filter at all. If I’ve missed one, please let me know.
    So while you’re quite right to argue that no single rightist MSM columnist is obliged to rant about the net filter if it’s not a big issue to them, I find the odds of not a single one deciding that this was a good chance to stick another boot into the current govt to be rather slim at best.

  11. Kit Whitfield has written a reference post about mental illness, colloquial terms and stigma.
    Also, Sufjan Stevens is an excellent Christmas soundtrack.

%d bloggers like this: