. Well surprise, surprise. Per Laura Rozen, it was the Post’s website that was responsible for the offensive title/graphic on the Charlotte Allen article — and for leaving it up there for over 24 hours, long after the controversy had erupted. I get credit for calling that one. Thank you, Jim Brady.

. If I was a guy I’d probably be just about as insulted by this article on "The Angry White Male" that Jill highlights. "Excuse me if I lack patience for ‘progressive’ arguments that these are the guys we should be pandering to," says Jill. I guess those Third Way fuckers got it right — for all the predictably wrong reasons.

Jessica compiles a list of favorite feminist minded movies, and offers up Girls Town with Lili Taylor. I’m partial to Foxfire with teenage Angelina Jolie, where five girls get together and beat up a teacher who sexually harassed them. Angelina had kind of a young Joan Jett thing going on that was pretty hard to resist.

. Belated congratulations to Garance for her Washington Post gig, they need her desperately.

. Rebecca Juro will be talking with Donna Rose, the HRC’s only transgender board member who resigned to protest divisive tactics used to advocate for ENDA on QMO online from 7-10 ET tonight.

. Per Pam, Republicans in Iowa failed to force constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. Quick, somebody grab me the world’s smallest violin…

. Sarah Posner has "This Week in the Religious Right" over at Tapped. Her God’s Profits on religious hucksters is always worth a plug.

. Lots of people talking about this article telling women to quit your job and devote yourself to dating now if you ever want to procreate. Amanda fisks it appropriately:

Let’s assume for a moment that the logistical arguments in here are possible—that it’s doable to live as a part-time worker in a go-nowhere job so you free up 20 extra hours a week to cruise Match.com, which is apparently more time-consuming that any job ever could be. While that’s blatant nonsense, even if it were true, it would cripple your “value” on the dating “market” with the kind of men you’re probably interested in. If you go on a date with the kind of guy that you would have a lot in common with if you hadn’t committed to this bizarre plan, he’d drop you like a rock once you revealed that you’d given up your ambitions to spend a lot of time dating. And if he didn’t drop you, you wouldn’t want him, because he’s probably the kind of douchebag who would date a woman who doesn’t pursue a career because it would cut into her time dating. If good men are as hard to find as these articles invariably imply, then why on earth would you make yourself a significantly less attractive person by reducing the amount of positive qualities you have?

These articles have been flaring up like a bad case of phlebitis my entire life. And I wonder — who writes them? My eighty-two year old mother never had such stupid, atavistic notions so it’s not generational. It must be some specific synapse that just doesn’t fire in some people.

Video via Feministing in honor of Charlotte Allen and the Washington Post, who can all kiss my ass.


Related posts:

  1. And If He Doesn’t Confess to Being a CIA Agent, Waterboard the Shit out of Him
  2. Late Night: The Republican Exodus, or “Rush Commands It, Bitches!”
  3. Late Night: Horrible Old Farts Protect Nation from Tits and Bad Words; Brent Bozell Applauds, Thinks That’s The Shit
  4. Steve Schmidt Sells Shit by the Seashore
  5. And if Anyone Knows a Pile of Shit When He Sees It, It’s John Boehner