Sommers is still being a hack.
Christina H. Sommers @CHSommers · 8 hours ago
Dear liberals, When you side with today’s 3rd wave intersectional feminism, you are siding with the intellectual equivalent of creationism.
Don’t forget, she used to be an academic. There are standards in academia. Academics aren’t supposed to say flagrantly untrue things like that.
And she retweeted this piece of shit –
@CHSommers have you seen this? I think it’s pretty funny.
“This” is a four panel cartoon of a bratty little girl having a tantrum, shouting “Boys are icky and gross” and other classics of feminism, and an adult women with “BASED MOM” on her shirt giving her a bottle and sending her off for a nap.
Yeah. We’re all bratty little girls and Sommers is the calm wise adult. Sure.
Sommers used to be a philosopher. I’m not even making that up.
Sommers better not talk shit about creationism too loudly. Her conservative backers may not believe in that shit, but they rely on the votes of the idiots who do.
Wow. She’s dropping all pretense now.
Like Julie Burchill (prolly even more so), she is an intelligent woman who has spent her adult life making herself stupid.
Oh barf.
She still manages to be one of the smartest of the Koch Brother’s paid cheerleaders. Not that that’s much of an accomplishment. The fact that she’s debased herself to the point that she’s embracing low-grade internet misogyny trolls who call her “mom” is kind of sad, though. Are we taking bets on how long it will be before she’s selling homeopathic cure-all medicines on TV late at night?
I’m waiting for the part where Richard Dawkins tweets that Christina Hoff Sommers is straining at gnats while there are actual creationists, who believe the creationist equivalent of creationism, fight against women’s rights.
Or does he not mind that she’s continually sounding the all clear for women’s rights? “We did it, everyone! Job done. From here on in you’re just whining. Now, let’s all sit down and watch Bayonetta’s ass twitch with the boys.”
Has she provided any actual evidence for her rational, “evidence based” feminism?
Can’t wait to see Dawkins’ next tweet. What an embarrassment he has become.
Christina Hoff Sommers makes videos Prager University. And, yes, Dennis Prager advocated for “Judeo-Christian” from of politic.
And actual creationists call him a friend.
So, yes, CHS is being a hypocrite when she makes this claim. She works with creationists willingly.
She’s just in it for the clicks.
This really could be the beginning of the end for Dawkins. If he willingly associates himself with creationists, he’ll be the laughing stock of his own academic community. Right now, he’s at most two steps removed, possibly one.
screechy – that IS one degree, by bacon rules. lol, unto the soulless heavens themselves.
I notice that Dawkins also approves of Mollie Hemingway, another anti-feminist. The same Mollie Hemingway who wrote a piece called “My Name’s Mollie And I’m A Submissive Wife”, trying to justify biblical commands for wives to submit to their husbands.
Well I do respect her right to call those who disagree with her creationists – I often call anti-feminists and MRAs creationists myself – but you do need to be able to back the assertion up. I call anti-feminists creationists because they rely on badly designed studies, well designed studies that don’t support their conclusions (apparently either hoping that nobody checks, or having never checked themselves), quote mines, outright lies, and incoherent, contradictory rants that start nowhere, go nowhere, and end nowhere.
Now, I’m sure the same is true of some feminists too – I met one just last month – but I’ve yet to meet a single anti-feminist for whom this wasn’t true. Even those who, on other topics, are entirely capable of expressing rational concepts, switch to nonsensical rants when they’re talking about feminism. They argue against concepts that aren’t held anymore, or were never held by any but a minority. They argue against equivocated definitions of concepts (anyone who’s ever discussed privilege online should know the “but I don’t get free government doughnuts in the mail each morning!!” reaction) and act as if different, but tangentially related events are identical. They are not being rational. Their behaviour is identical in form to that of creationists. What argument does she have against feminist rationality?
Oh, and they also prop Sommers up as a “true feminist” in much the same way that creationists like to call their pet intellectuals “true scientists,” or S E Cupp a “true atheist.”
Well Athywren beat me to it (and probably said it better) but I’ve said it before elsewhere. Seeing Richard Dawkins citing the American Enterprise Institute’s Sommers as a feminist authority is as disappointing as if he were citing one of the Discovery Institute’s pet academics on evolution.
She works for the same people who publish “scholarly” articles about the importance of the Decalogue, climate change denial and racist pseudo-science.
I’ll just copy-paste myself:
For me, the defining moment was when I was reading a UN report on measuring sexual violence, and it casually name-dropped “intersectionality.” In twenty years, we’ve gone from “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory, and Antiracist Politics” to “15 years of THE UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, Its Causes and Consequences.” Longer if you count “The Combahee River Collective Statement” or “Ain’t I a Woman?“
There’s nothing funny about that comic. Seriously. I say this not because I’m on “the other side” of it’s philosophy. It’s just not funny. Turn all the words around so it’s a Christina Hoff Sommers throwing a tantrum and a adult authority figure feminist and it’s still not funny. There’s no humor here. None. No twist to the story, no subverted expectation, no clever play on words. It’s an insult. And she thinks it’s “pretty funny”. It’s the kind of “humor” most of us grow out of in grade school.
“Well, here’s what you look like!” *sticks fingers in nose and drools*
“DO NOT! You look like this!” *Pulls eyelid down, juts jaw out to the side*
Hilarious.
@16 A Hermit
I think we should make Dawkins own it…there’s nothing wrong with the analogy of:
Sommers is to feminism as Ham is to evolution.
He’s aligned himself with an anti-feminist. He needs to wear that each and every encounter.
Dang, now I regret that bit about Feminist Economics being the fourth-cited journal in the field. I read that a few years ago online, and while I probably have the link buried somewhere it felt like a good idea to rediscover it again, to make sure nothing’s changed.
Instead, I discovered that journal is ranked anywhere from 20th to 305th, depending on what metrics you use. Whoops, lousy argument on my part.
Ah well, you can always read that journal for yourself and come to your own conclusions. Some academic access may be required to get full access, but you can see some abstracts. Here’s one from the latest issue:
Huh. But Ayaan Hirsi Ali assured me feminists were ignoring Islam!
She’s just outed herself, yet again, as nothing more than a feMRA. That is Elam et al’s favourite line at the moment, feminism=creationism. They can’t back it up amazingly as I had an argument with an AVfM contributor who said that – mentioned implicit bias 400+ papers on it, Stereotype threat 300+ papers on it … Best they could manage was an assertion that IB and ST have nothing to do with feminism! Cos yeah, proof of endemic sexism and the damaging effect of cultural attitudes has nothing to do with feminism 😛