I'm speechless. Her work has influence my thinking in such a profound way; I can't look at literature, media, or anything in the world without a seething contempt for the structures of thought that have developed the average human mind like they have. I am actually a little bit bashful now that I know that a student of hers is auditing my thoughts. It's a real pleasure to have some vague, pseudo-discussion with you, however limited.
You, my friend, are fallacious and inflammatory. The only thing that is remotely interesting about your post is your incessant adherence to your confused, jumbled logic. The people who comment on "Digg" have absolutely no correlation to "Digg" itself (I've never "Dugg" anything in my life, and your article told me what "Digg" was for the first time). You commit a fallacy that most feminists commit: the fallacy of accident. You apply your desire to find things that indicate oppression to something that isn't an indicator of oppression.
I entirely agree with the ideals of feminism. There is definitely a systematic oppression that exists that is the result of patterns of thought that intellectual men created that impacts everyone who participates in such thought patterns, whether they recognize it or not. I just can't accept unintelligent applications of feminism that make people who are smarter than I'll ever be, like Iris Young (and if you don't know who she is, then you need to stop posting your thoughts about feminism, because you don't have the slightest idea of what you're talking about), look comparable to me. Articles like these are what makes feminists look laughable. Well, since you've spear-headed your own cause, I suppose now is a good time to remind you that you're not Mrs. Ted Haggard. You can always be thankful for that. -Michael SchwemmerWisconsin