I’m a kick-ass barbecued, folks. You haven’t been to heaven before you tried one of my barbecues.

Incredible! For the first time in years, Vine offered me books that I actually want to read. It only took a dozen purchases of Zygmunt Bauman’s books for the program to offer me a new Bauman and a new Ulrich Beck. Of course, it classified Beck as “Medicine” and Bauman as “Science and Technology”, but it’s miles better than the time when I was offered a novel by Tess Gerritsen about gruesome serial murders under the heading of “Christian Books and Bibles.”

So all of this ridiculous blethering about the evil nature of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and some completely idiotic fantasies about her collusion with Hillary led to. . . support for a Trump-like anti-semitic opponent of the Iran deal?

Yes, nothing sexist here at all. Not even remotely.

Women who complain that they do a lot more childcare than their husbands, leading to losses in professional development or beauty time, need to ask themselves: do they contribute to manufacturing a distance between father and child? Do they insert themselves into their relationship with suggestions, control, hovering, constant presence and supervision?

Because I know I do.

I’m the last person I would have expected to be a helicoptering Mommy. Over the years, I have worn my tongue to a stub and my fingers to nibs telling women in RL and online to stop inserting themselves between fathers and children. I can recite miles upon miles of theory on the importance of paternal involvement and of a timely transition through all the stages of cutting the emotional umbilical cord. And here I am, having to fight a veritable battle with my desire to hover. I’m boring myself stiff with how stupid and useless I’m being about this. 

I’ll win this battle for sure but I have to conclude that, in developed countries, just like the “women do more housework” slogan, the “women do more childcare” trope is meticulously constructed by women themselves. At least, I didn’t have to fight myself over the pathetic “I do the dishes / clean / do laundry, etc because if I let him do it, I’ll have to rewash / clean all over again, etc afterwards.” That kind of insanity, at least, I have been spared. 

Who’s with me in that the notorious “Confessions of a Recovering Tumblr Feminist” post that is being massively linked and cited is a fake?

I got suspicious of it from its very beginning when I read the following [emphasis is mine]:

For me, feminism was an enticing religion. Raised in a home devoid of faith, I eagerly accepted its philosophy as my ticket to salvation.

Really? A home devoid of faith? Secular people don’t speak like that. This is the flowery and exalted language of an Evangelical who is posing as a feminist. But wait, there is more:

For example, feminist ideology taught me that any opinions that were conservative, or just didn’t align with the party line were violence.  It also taught me that the best way to fight opposition is to try to silence it. Don’t like what someone says? Protest them. Shut their event down.

This is a parody of feminism that I keep encountering on the ultra-conservative websites that I read assiduously. Nobody in actual feminist circles says things like “any conservative opinions are violence.” I detest Women’s Studies departments as much as the next person but they don’t speak this way. To the contrary, what’s exasperating about them is how hard they try to be inclusive and not to criticise anybody for fear of hurting feelings.

This was seen most recently, when Milo Yiannopoulos’s speech at DePaul University came to an end when two social justice warriors ran onto the stage and hijacked the mic in protest of Milo’s views.

A real ex-feminist would mention the de-platforming of Madeleine Albright, not this mumbly fellow. He is of interest only to the Evangelicals whose websites, I repeat, I read all the time.

It’s not the substance of what she is saying that I find suspicious. It’s the language, the exaltation, and the examples she chooses.