October 9, 2010

Did Slate's collection of essays inspire anyone to engage with the hoary question "Who Gets to Be a Feminist?"

I mean, anyone other than the women — the writers were all women — who wrote the essays.

I pointed you toward my essay here. Did you even go over there and read what I wrote? I know I got almost no visitors coming here from over there. Did you click back to page 1 of the 4 pages of essays and read through them all and spend time cogitating about what "feminist" means?

I'm seeing zero discussion of this essay collection elsewhere on the web. It got a few links, but not with any engagement in the question. I'm not sad about this, mind you. The lack of response kind of proved the point I made in my essay.

Talking about feminism is a sidetrack, and the women writers — they're pretty much all women — who occupy themselves writing about the meaning of feminism are willingly confining themselves to an echo chamber. Liberate yourselves!


As my whimsy leads me.. said...

I read your essay over there. I didn't go to page 1, but got there through another link, thought, "Oh, that's the rest of the article," read a bit, it was boring, went on to something else.


Tertium Quid said...

Conservative women, perhaps ironically according to some, are more likely to be liberated than their more vocally "feminist" sisters.

traditionalguy said...

Ho, ho, ho. That was funny. The days of Feminist Heroics may be as gone with the wind as the Kennedy Camelot Myth. Been there done that and got the T-shirt. We have serious problems to confront now...and marriage to a compatible spouse is the absolute best economic move to weather the storms ahead.

Trooper York said...

Hey maybe you can dress up as a feminist re-enactor for Halloween.

T J Sawyer said...

"I know I got almost no visitors coming here from over there."

I always open links in a new tab so there's no return trip on your sitemeter. Got in this habit both to save time and avoid the "valley of no return" that some media sites present.

Pretty poor writing, not to mention thinking outside of your contribution. Why are "feminists" so hard to read?

michaele said...

Yes, I did need the extra nudge to go over and read most of the essays. Without your link taking me to page 4 where your essay was located, I don't think I would have dedicated that much time to get to it. The more militant feminists lost any credibility for me when they totally rallied in support of Bill Clinton after railing a few years earlier against Bob Packwood and Clarence Thomas. The light bulb went off that it was all about abortion and they were dishonest not to admit it.

traditionalguy said...

Women are hated by some and women are loved and respected by many. The answer is to meet safe people before assuming you will be loved and respected. If that sounds too hard to do, then miss out on the best life has to offer and cling to your female friends who are 10 times more likely to be un-safe people.

Oligonicella said...

Frankly, since I tend to interact and view people as individuals, why should I invest any time whatsoever in studying feminist or masculinist materials or pondering what those terms 'mean'?

'Isting' one's self is nothing more than assumed authority.

edutcher said...

I did flip through them (did read yours), although I got tired of variations on a theme after a while.

My mother always said, "Women don't like other women as much as men like other men". It always struck me that feminist cred was another way of keeping some people out of the clubhouse. What was it one of them said, "'Mean Girls' without Lindsay Lohan"?

Since my sister once subscribed to Ms magazine, I got a pretty good idea of what feminist meant to those who claimed the title. I suppose if we want to go by what feminism was advertised as being when we first heard the word (equal, pull your weight, no more excuses), the mama grizzlies would seem to fill the bill.

campy said...

"Feminist" = "male-hating bigot"

It's that simple.

DKWalser said...


Thanks for the second pointer to your essay. I had clicked through to the collection but I did not have the patience to wade through more than the 1st page. Like you, I don't find arguments about terms interesting unless those terms have consequences.

EDH said...

"Did Slate's collection of essays to inspire anyone to engage with the hoary question "Who Gets to Be a Feminist?""

Did you just call me a whore?

Chris -- Hey why the long face?
Larry -- uh oh Something's wrong with these berries.
Chris -- What makes you say that?
Larry -- Because they're messing up our vision. Maybe we shouldn't eat anymore.
Chris -- Did you just call me a whore?
Larry -- No
Chris -- Are you insinuating that I'm not good looking enough to be a floor?
Larry -- That's it! This is my side of the world. Until you feel like being civilized---stay on your own side.
Chris -- Jeeze I'm so scared...I'm so frightened. The last thing I'd ever want to do is touch your side of the world.
(CHRIS touches Larry's S/O/W with a "Bink!"

deborah said...

"Talking about feminism is a sidetrack, and the women writers — they're pretty much all women — who occupy themselves writing about the meaning of feminism are willingly confining themselves to an echo chamber. Liberate yourselves!"

I read your answer the day you posted the link. Your second criterion gave me pause:

" 1. a feminist is anyone who believes in the equality of the sexes, and 2. a feminist is someone who centers her political activities on the interests of women and steadfastly puts those interests first."

According to that, I'm not much of a feminist...well, maybe I am. With your Bill Clinton slam follow-up, you were just being naughty.

When there was speculation of Obama choosing Webb for running mate, I considered his disparaging remarks about women when he was Secretary of the Navy in the late 80s.

"In 1987, he served as Secretary of the Navy, becoming the first Naval Academy graduate to serve as the civilian head of the Navy. As Navy Secretary, Webb pushed the appointment of Alfred M. Gray, Jr. as Commandant of the Marine Corps, hoping that Gray could reshape the Corps into the elite unit it once was.[14] Webb resigned in 1988 after refusing to agree to reduce the size of the Navy. Webb had wished to increase the Navy to 600 ships. Webb continued his opposition to the expanded role for women in the navy after his appointment as Navy Secretary. In a speech at the Naval Academy shortly after his appointment, he referred to female students as "thunder thighs," much to the delight of those who opposed increased opportunity for women (who became known as the "Webbites").[15] As revealed in The Reagan Diaries, President Ronald Reagan wrote on February 22, 1988: "I don't think Navy was sorry to see him go."[16]

After his resignation, Webb earned his living primarily as an author and filmmaker. He won an Emmy Award for his 1983 PBS coverage of the U.S. Marines in Beirut."


On the other hand, he is a true American hero.

But, ultimately, considering his intemperate remarks about women, and the stupidity of packing a loaded firearm in D.C...oh, hell, I don't know. He was against Desert Shield and against down-sizing the Navy. I can't help but admire the guy.

What was the quesiton? Oh, yeah, finally, what a compliment to the Professor to be invited to comment among such an august coterie. My, my, I think it will be sooner, rather than later, that our Althouse gets a real gig somewhere.

Quaestor said...

Feminism isn't an ideology, it's a clique. Membership is awarded solely by the Ins and at their discretion.

AllenS said...

Well, here's my take on who gets to be a feminist...


I tried.

WV: unhyman

You can't make this stuff up.

E. Ilana Diamant said...

I feel the same way about the "echo-chamber" that you mentioned.

dbp said...

I read Althouse's essay, thought it was sensible and more-or-less lost interest in the subject after that.

I ended-up at the Slate collection a couple of other times via links from other blogs.

Michael Haz said...

Feminism? Ha!

Can't tell an off-color joke at work or there'll be hell to pay; but no big deal if women in other countries are totally enslaved, subjugated,and get flogged, stoned, or burned to death.

Plus, liberal men can say all kinds of misogynist shit and it's okay, just as long as they support abortion "rights".

What a false ideology.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I've been tossing around the idea of trying to write a good sized piece on "what is feminism" and/or "am I a feminist?" but I haven't been able to figure out exactly how to do it. I think that the professor's essay really showed why I'm having so much trouble.

The inclination seems to be to define feminism in a way that includes yourself (AA's first definition), but that's not interesting. I am, I believe, living a model life of equality of the sexes, and yet, I'm quite conservative and disagree on almost all of the things that so-called feminists hang their hats on. It's a puzzle, but I don't think it's one I can solve.

William said...

The liberals worked to overthrow obscenity restrictions on free speech. They thought that this would allow for the publication of novels like Ulysses and Lady Chatterly's Lover and the sensitive exploration about the nature of human sexuality. Instead they got Hustler cervix shots.....The feminists thought that when women reached parity with men, they would see people like Gloria Steinhem and Susan Sontag running for office and managing corporations. Instead they got women like Sarah Palin and Linda McMahon.....Democracy always subverts the high ideals of the left. The American public is unworthy of them.

Lucien said...

Read the series of articles & thought Nora Ephron would be OK with the Taliban if they allowed abortion.

The trouble, as La Althouse's second criterion & reference to Clinton illuminated, is that some self-proclaimed feminists act as if feminism is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the political left.

Thus, they are willing to subordinate the interests of women to the left/liberal orthodoxy, (e.g.,cultural sensitivity when discussing genital mutilation, honor killings, etc.)

On the other hand, I would like to see a genuine response from some of those on the right to the question "How can you call yourself a feminist and still believe in . . ."

Tyrone Slothrop said...

I confess, the first time I looked at the article there just seemed to be too many pages of women saying basically the same thing, that no one can own the word feminism. Most of them were probably women who actually believed that their faction did, in fact, own the word, but had too much sense to air this in public.

I will say, at the risk of being accused of being an Althouse butt-kisser, that the Professor's contribution made the most sense of the ones I read.

The tiny bit of ground I choose to defend in this is, Sarah Palin is a feminist by any fair definition of the word, but the loudest practitioners of feminism apply the litmus test of abortion and cast her out. Screw them. They are not feminists by my definition. As Ann points out in her contribution, those same "feminists" fell all over themselves defending Clinton in the most blatant case of sexual harassment I've ever heard of.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Lucien said: I would like to see a genuine response from some of those on the right to the question "How can you call yourself a feminist and still believe in . . ."

As I indicated above, I'm not sure that I call myself a feminist, but I'd be happy to take that challenge (I'm more of a right-leaning liberatarian, so I'm not sure that I would believe in all of the ". . .", but I'll give it a whirl).

What ". . ." would you like me to justify first?

- Lyssa

Synova said...

I clicked over there and read the page the click led to. I didn't realize there were several pages preceding that one.

Synova said...

I took an online test once to see "what kind of feminist are you". I turned out to be an "Individualist Feminist" which was another way of saying "Mostly Libertarian."

I don't think that counts by most accounts because it doesn't see women as a group, but as individuals the same as men. And it certainly doesn't favor the sorts of "cooperative" things that are supposed to typify a female person... it's why we're better communicators, you know, because we are team builders and prefer cooperative effort that benefits the whole. (snark!)

But I'm equal opportunity. I get really annoyed at the "Wow, you're so AWESOME because you're a MOTHER" things too. Being female is hardly something that a person can take personal credit for, and being a mother is hardly any more credit worthy than being born with a vagina.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Synova said: And it certainly doesn't favor the sorts of "cooperative" things that are supposed to typify a female person... it's why we're better communicators, you know, because we are team builders and prefer cooperative effort that benefits the whole. (snark!)

this is off-topic, but in college, I took a class called "Sex, Gender, and Language" (Don't ask me why). At one point, the professor was going on and on about how women are more "community" minded, and wish to build consensus and get along.

I asked, why, if that were the case, women tend to be so much more difficult to get along with than men when providing customer service (I was a waitress at the time, and had worked in numerous other customer service jobs- I think most people who have done that sort of job would agree that women customers, in general, are infinitely more difficult to please and easier to offend than men.)

Now, I asked this quite honestly, not to snark. I think that there could be some good answers to it that don't destroy the theory that women are "community-minded", for example, that women who are customers don't see themselves as of the same "community" as their service providers. I thought that it could have been interesting to explore. The professor did not; she blew it off and refused to discuss even the possibility that women tend to be shitty customers or have negative qualities in any way.

It taught me a lot.

- Lyssa

Almost Ali said...

Are women smarter than men, or, why abortion is the feminists only argument:

"For not only is the average man more intelligent than the average woman but also a clear and rather startling imbalance emerges between the sexes at the high levels of intelligence that the most demanding jobs require.

For instance, at the near-genius level (an IQ of 145), brilliant men outnumber brilliant women by 8 to one. That's statistics, not sexism."

More here.

Almost Ali said...

...(present company excluded!)

Fen said...

I went and read it all.

I liked what you had to say, but I agree with a previous poster that for many of the "feminists" there, it was just an excuse to attack Sarah Palin.

Of course, I stopped listening to "feminists" after they gave Clinton a pass in exchange for a veto of a partial-birth abortion ban.

The Left doesn't really believe in the things they lecture us about.

John Lynch said...

Nothing new at all to see there.

Abortion + lefty politics = feminism.

Why not just admit it?

Fen said...

I remember my "feminist" Rhetoric prof coming into the classroom on the day story broke and asking "is the President's sex life any of our business?".

She was serious. Sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, sexual assault. All "just about sex, MoveOn".


ndspinelli said...

I guess law profs are bossy feminists. Attorneys are control freaks, so I guess you teach the children well.

I did read your piece and found it ok, not worthy of remark, but ok. Is this a pass/fail test...gee I sure do hope I passed. I also read Sara Haji's tome and believe it would have been better if she wore a burqua in her photo.

Eating mass quantities of chocolate and spending freely @ the store, I'm thinking that dark feminist, Menny Pause is in town?

that-xmas said...

The problem with the article, is that you get to Nora Ephron's response and you just give up...

word verification: "nosist" :)

Bruce said...

"Who's a feminist?" is about as interesting to me as "Who's an accordian player?"

traditionalguy said...

That was un-called for Professor: Saying feminism is a Hoary question insults virtuous women that are definitely NOT hoars.

Kirby Olson said...

Truculence toward men is what defines feminism. In short, it's misandry reframed as policy. It's persecution of men disguised as a remedy for persecution of women. It's the projection of all violence on to men, and thus uses violence to erase them, first as a cultural mode, and ultimately as a governmental role, beginning with aborting male babies, and then crushing them and driving them toward suicide in schools, and finally, interning them in camps, where they will be gassed (the last phase is about ten years away, and needs a powerful feminist figure to attain the highest office to implement).

It's Madonna (the old model) and Lady Gaga (the new model). When Lady Gaga kills the men in the cafe, using the feminist film as model, it's found its truest goal. The murder of men, as political goal, and ultimately, as policy.

that-xmas said...

I've always been confused by the heavy definition of feminism. Feminists get angry when you ask them the definition of feminism. If you don't know what it means, you're automatically against it.

They bring up ending the "Patriarchy", and they get angry when you ask them to describe the alternative. They get even angrier when you bring up that rule by roving gangs of 14-30 year-old males with machine guns and machetes is a valid consequence to the end of the Patriarchy.

They bring up "white male privilege" and they get all annoyed when you want to talk about the privileges enjoyed by other social groups.

rhhardin said...

Marge Piercey "The Wrong Anger" (1982)begins

Infighting, gut battles we all
wage so well. Carnage in the fish tank.
Alligators wreatling in bed.
Nuclear attack
across the breakfast table.
Duels in the women's center.
The fractioning faction fight...

Trooper York said...

Can we talk about some "whorey" questions instead?

stevenehrbar said...

I read them all, actually.

If feminism is indeed a species of "Social Justice", as one commenter declared, then it is absolutely necessary that feminism be marginalized and destroyed, just like all other species of "Social Justice".

If feminism absolutely requires government-funded daycare (as one said absolutely and others strongly implied), feminism is nothing more than narrow lobbying on the behalf of professional women, and is no more worth treating as a movement than anyone else on K Street.

And so on. Every definition of "feminist" that managed to exclude Sarah Palin managed to marginalize itself into making the "feminist" label something to be actively avoided. Every definition broad enough to exclude Palin was broad enough to make the "feminist" label largely meaningless in the modern American political environment (but, not on a global or historical basis).

stevenehrbar said...

Er, "broad enough to include Palin", not exclude.

Chip Ahoy said...

"... as interesting to me as "Who's an accordian player?"

You'd be interested in Alexander Hrustevich

Anne B. said...

Lyssa said:

``...in college, I took a class called "Sex, Gender, and Language" (Don't ask me why)."

Probably for the same reason I took a course in Kahlil Gibran: I needed to make up a credit.

I skimmed the article Ann linked to - Sarah is really in their heads, isn't she? The article was ostensibly about feminism in general but so many of them spent their energies attacking her ... kinda like the cool kids at the sixth-grade lunch table who make fun of the brainy girl with the glasses and the unfashionable clothes.

Small credit (very small) to the obnoxious Nora Ephron, for keeping it brief. Practically everyone else was a natterer.

Meade said...

Yeah - liberate yourselves.

You want to know who gets to be a feminist?

Ask your husbands.

c3 said...

Now look what you made me do. I had read a couple and then (thanks to Anne) I read Nora Ephron's. How can someone who makes such sweet (ok they're commercial) movies be such as ...........

former law student said...

Did you even go over there and read what I wrote?

I really wasn't in the mood. To me the subject of feminism is as chewed over as the desiccated blob of gum stuck under the desktop at school.

I did see all the usual suspects were represented. Marcotte typically asserted that if you oppose feticide you can't be a feminist, I guess on the principle that men are free from the burden of pregnancy women will not be equal till they are likewise free.

Synova said...

"You want to know who gets to be a feminist?

Ask your husbands.

This is so funny, actually. I made the mistake once of saying that I wasn't a feminist and got torn a new one by a "I'm-not-a-feminazi". I got accused of being told what to think by men, got called a "little lady" and generally got condescended to to a degree that outweighed all other condescension that I'd experienced in my life combined.

How is it that in order to prove I did not "get told what to think by men" I was required to submit instead to the identity and ideology of particular women?

Submission is submission, and the fact that the bully is female doesn't change that.

deborah said...

"...(present company excluded!)"

RH always forgets to add that.

Ralph L said...

Ironrails would like it to be a hairy question. Will (butch) Lesbians be the last unshaven women in America?

Why is kicking out the Clinton hypocrites considered a "trouble?"

lyssalovelyredhead said...

I made the mistake once of saying that I wasn't a feminist and got torn a new one by a "I'm-not-a-feminazi". I got accused of being told what to think by men, got called a "little lady" and generally got condescended to to a degree that outweighed all other condescension that I'd experienced in my life combined.

A few weeks ago, in a discussion on this topic, a liberal *male* friend lectured me about how much I needed to appreciate the abortion rights that others had fought to give me.

Me! I've been married for 9 years, having smoking hot sex the entire time. Also during that time, I've earned both a B.S. and a J.D., both with stellar grades, and a good bit of professional development and accomplishment. All while fully accepting that, should I get pregnant, abortion was in no way, shape, or form, an option, and planning accordingly.

Do NOT tell me that without the feminist obsession with baby-killing, I'd be lost.

ken in sc said...

It was boring.

Ralph L said...

Considering that few things are more critical to the maintenance of the patriarchy than controlling women's reproduction.... - Marcotte
37 years after Roe, and you still haven't been able to scrape out the Patriarchy!
You are the Weakest Sex! Goodbye.

Meade said...

"A few weeks ago, in a discussion on this topic, a liberal *male* friend lectured me about how much I needed to appreciate the abortion rights that others had fought to give me. "

lyssa, What your friend may have been trying to express was that HE needed you to appreciate that the freedoms, gained by the abortion rights others had fought for, were in fact for HIM.

Roger J. said...

What the hell is feminism any more--the alleged feminists gave it up when monica was giving Willie hummers in the white house--the ONLY thing feminists have these days is some sort of fetish with Roe v Wade--collectively they are as dumb as a box of rocks, and individually even duller.
Betty Friedan must be rolling in her grave

Synova said...

I think that there really was a time when a woman couldn't get along economically without a man, and having a man meant having babies, and babies (not the Patriarchy, as the honest feminists realize) are the problem.

The problem for modern feminists is... fewer people believe the whining about "controlling your reproduction" anymore.

It's pretty much impossible to claim that the constraints of society mean you unexpectedly and unfortunately and not of your own volition find yourself with child anymore. I think that once that was true. It's just not anymore.

It's *your* reproduction, control it and shut up.

Synova said...

I'd like to sort of disagree with Althouse about the echo chamber though... there is certainly an echo chamber but I think that what so many modern feminists confine themselves to is more than an echo chamber.

As a sideline, sitting around commiserating with your friends, or hanging on blogs with a reasonable cadre of like minds... its sort of fun.

But *professional* feminism is more than an echo chamber... it's like dedicating your life study to the very important study of the economic and environmental impact of weaving in Burgundy between 1250 and 1308 and then being mad all of the time that you're not getting the material success you deserve.

I think the word might be "cloister".

And professional feminists limit themselves and complain about being limited. Open the Abby doors, come out and join us.

rcocean said...

I like good writing so I read the Althouse part. The other contributions were just vapid and verbose, no doubt read only by Women studies graduates and Rachael Maddow.

chr1 said...

A Great Nation deserves Great Social Programs and "the girls" can crusade indefinitely, enjoying their new found freedom. I suspect confusing ideals and politics corrupts both.

deborah said...

"lyssa, What your friend may have been trying to express was that HE needed you to appreciate that the freedoms, gained by the abortion rights others had fought for, were in fact for HIM."

Here is the crux of the matter. Yes, yes, women have the inalienable right to abort their fetuses. But at what cost?

Bruce Hayden said...

Can we talk about some "whorey" questions instead?

Just a slight detour, but the MSM is going crazy trying to cover up the Jerry Brown "Whitman is a Whore" story. MSNBC apparently bleeped out the word in its reporting, and CBS first ignored the story, then tried to bury it.

So, how do the feminists handle this? Jerry Brown announces NOW endorsement one day after Meg Whitman slur.

Bruce Hayden said...

Back to the subject at hand. I started with the page that Ann was on. The woman above her was railing about the Israeli occupation of Palestine, while ignoring the much bigger problems for women imposed by fundamentalist Islam. But, then I read Ann's segment, and it was very well done. I went back to the start of the article, and read all the different women, and it was mostly downhill from that point on.

The two things I came away with from the entire article were that to be a feminist, a woman had to be pro-Death (aka pro-Choice), and hate Sarah Palin with a passion. Those are the litmus tests, and nothing else matters.

ndspinelli said...

Bruce asked, "Who's an accordian player?"

A: Myron Floren, of course.

former law student said...

how do the feminists handle this?

After Whitman sold out her principles for a labor endorsement, someone who works for Jerry Brown called her a whore. One definition of whore is someone who compromises her principles for personal gain. Meg Whitman is a whore, because she sold out her principles (reduced pensions for public employees) for personal gain (labor endorsement for Governor).


Fen said...

Well FLS, by that definition, you are a also a whore

Omaha1 said...

I also needed a nudge to go and read what you wrote. It was measured and reasonable, about what I have come to expect from your writing. Loved the dig at the Clinton supporters, who richly deserve it.

On "feminists" and abortion - they never seem to grapple with the slaughter of unborn females in the third world. I guess it's OK to kill the girl babies, as long as those permitted to live can eventually be properly enlightened.

TJ said...

To listen to the permanent feminist noise machine is like a parent listening to their adult stay at home kids pontificating about something they learned in college.

Talk your bullshit, but it don't exist without my support.

And so it is with feminism. It only exists as long as men are willing to enforce it.

Usually feminism is used like racism, trying to either get money out of some entity, or to bludgeon someone that the fems want silenced.

I'd like to see Dahlia Lithwick take this BS feminism on the road to, say, Afghanistan. We could probably stamp her passport oneway.

mlotti said...

I, for one, came here from the Slate article. Never heard of you before that. Your answer to the questions was the best -- or the least obfuscating, which is the same thing in an article.

roesch-voltaire said...

Sara Haji's writing reminded me of when feminist discussions resulted in actions. Today it seems easy to toss off the question as only rhetoric generated my middle class white women. Sisters of Islam, however, are one of many current examples of women fighting for inclusion and equal opportunity that remind us of what it took to become a feminist.

Tina Trent said...

Well, I beat my way past the VERY boring "transnational-and-intersecting-identities-except-Sarah-Palin and-anyone-who-looks-like-her" boutique identity-monger screed to read Althouse.

And that's why I don't read Slate's woman stuff, in general, not to mention Salon's. These columns either marginalize women's issues, or contort into exotic apologetics for not being diverse enough, or are just plain potty-mouthed (that would be the "third-wave feminism," which deserves a swift smack on the pants, except that they would mistake it for a transgressively empowering experience).

I'm just confused by the forum's first writer, who says women are "still excluded" from trades and transportation. I don't think that's true. Women still clearly select other types of work despite the significant unfair advantages proffered to them through government set-aside contracting. The places where women workers still get a raw deal are supermarket and other low-ticket retail, where management remains regressively male-favored, and poorly regulated industries populated by recent immigrants and illegal immigrants, for obvious and increasingly troubling reasons (what you do to the least among us you might eventually try to do to me).

And upscale restaurant staff and the DNC, of course.

Regarding law and its teaching, what I find gobsmacking about most of the people who agree among themselves that they are the only feminists is the degree to which they go to put women in far second place in precisely those legal arenas where they feel some people should actually be more equal than others.

"Who ought to be called an anti-feminist?" might be a better question for these particular forums.

The Crack Emcee said...

Everything I know I've learned from music:

Hey, Momma, folks say Poppa wasn't much on thinkin' - spent most of his time chasing women and drinkin'

The Crack Emcee said...

Poppa was a feminist.

yes said...

Well, I not only read it, I posted a comment. But it was a reply to someone else's comment disparaging Sarah Palin. (I don't remember exactly what and I'm not going back there to look.)

wv: pomplat
a cross between a pomegranate and a kumquat. (Tart!)