Extra Extra! Stupid Gender Stereotypes Are Still Alive and Kicking!

Bitchery veteran, founder of Smart Bitches Day and Slayer of Foley, Beth, forwarded me this steaming pile of stupid yesterday.

Go. Go read it. Make sure you have some clean rags on hand, because your head will a-splode. Go on. I’ll wait a few minutes.

OK, done?

To be frank, my brain is going through a Three Stooges moment, wherein all the thoughts are trying to rush out at the same time, only to get hopelessly stuck in the doorway while making ridiculous whooping sounds. Please forgive me if this is even less polished than my normal ramblings on this site.

First of all, this part of the article in particular made me laugh:

I was stunned the other day to discover that Flashman is just as popular with women as with men. Yes, Flashman, the outrageous Victorian bounder who kicks off the first novel in the series by raping his father’s girlfriend.

If he finds THIS stunning, one hates to imagine what would happen to his brain should somebody try to explain something TRULY weird about the world, like, say, quantum entanglement, or Tubgirl. But then, small minds are easily astonished, because they’re usually surprised at anything that can violate their dearly-held foundational beliefs.

And really, Johnson has approached this conundrum from entirely the wrong angle. He’s astonished that women would read action books, but doesn’t really ponder why men don’t like to read romances. I think the writer has missed out on a huge factor: the stigma of effeminacy.

Yes, women read more action books than men. You are more likely to see a woman reading a Tom Clancy than a man reading Maeve Binchy. I’ve covered this before in “You Read Like a Girl”. You can see this phenomenon extend beyond literature; once something is feminized, it’s seen as tainted, unworthy, less rigorous. Chick movies, chick cars, chick books: these are not compliments. These are terms of derision. Even the most reasonable men and many, many women are afraid of being tarred with the girly brush.

You see this happening in the working world and in academics as well. One of the first fields to attract large numbers of female students was literature and the arts, and nowadays, these fields are mostly written off as the territory of floppy-haired nancy-boys with even floppier wrists. The sciences, baby! That’s where it’s at. Only, once biology started attracting more and more women, the field started to be written off as less rigorous, too. Right now, the attitude seems to be that the REAL sciences are chemistry or physics—preferably the wackier theoretical branches of physics, where it’s still largely dominated by men.

And let’s talk about primary school teachers, something Johnson mentions in the article as having more males than females because of the “paedophile hysteria.” This flagrantly nonsensical explanation ignores the simple fact that more women than men get degrees in primary education, and more women apply for those jobs. Being a grade-school teacher is one of THE quintessential chick jobs of the modern world, with all the earmarks of a typical chick job: it has a large built-in nurturing component, it puts you in constant contact with people, it’s difficult to do yet rarely appreciated, and it pays shit.

There seems to be a rule regarding female critical mass in any area of life: if enough chicks are into it, it can’t be very good. It can’t be worthy. This goes for books, careers, movies, TV shows, cars, subjects of study, sports, clothing—hell, just about everything.

And reading seems to have been delegated as, well, a kind of girly thing to do. But it’s not just the stigma of effeminacy working against boys who read, I think. Kids who love to read and to learn for their own sake, especially the more quiet ones, have been picked on, bullied and called ugly names for a long, long time, and these sorts of things hit kids a lot harder than adults—as we grow older, we’re able to latch onto the anti-cool cool of being a nerd and say it out loud, I’m a geek and I’m proud. I imagine it’s even harder on boys than on girls, because boys are expected to act a certain way.

What way? I’ll allow Boris Johnson, gender relations analyzer extraordinaire, illuminate us as to the True Nature of Masculinity:

There is too much coursework, [Dr. Sewell] says, and not enough of the adrenaline-pumping terror of the exam. Boys need competition, he says, or they slump back into apathy and thuggishness.

They need facts and dates, not empathy. Dr Sewell is dead right. Here is the terrible truth about us boys. We may be devoted to our subjects. We may be interested in learning for its own sake. But what really actuates us, what makes us flog our way through the books on the syllabus, is the simultaneous hope of coming top and the fear of coming last.

Wait a second: England has gotten rid of exams and grades? I thought the only places that have done this were small liberal arts colleges with reputations for academic rigorousness that border on the fearsome, like Sarah Lawrence in NY and Reed College here in Portland. Huh. England’s education system is a lot more radical than I thought.

And honestly, is it the sissy-boy, wishy-washy, womanish lack of punishment that’s led to boys doing less well, or is it because the past century has been the first time that women have been allowed in the education system in the same numbers and on equal footing with men, and we’re finding out that females as a population seem to do better at certain skills required to be a good student, like sitting down and concentrating for long periods of time?

But that can’t be it, of course. Girls are doing better in school? IT MUST BE THE FEMINIZATION OF EDUCATION, OH NOES.

And if fear of coming last and hope of coming first is a motivator that’s more male than female, then I and many, many other women I know must be dudes.

But out of all the astonishing nuggets offered by Johnson, this one is perhaps the most astounding:

The reason women devour so much fiction is that it is the only place where they can find a certain idea of masculinity. It is a spirit that has been regulated out of the workplace and banished from the classroom.

Women turn to fiction, I would guess, because it is the last reservation for men who are neither violent thugs nor politically correct weeds, where a girl can still get her bodice ripped without the bodice ripper being locked up.

The urge for why I love reading so much, explicated at last! It has nothing to do with the joy of immersing myself in other points of view and other worlds, or vicariously experiencing adventures I will never be able to in real life, or the thrill of learning for the sake of learning, or the relief I get from having my over-active brain shut up and become occupied with something other than bugging me about endless reams of minutiae.

I read because I want a dick who can get away with acting like a dickhead.


Comments are Closed

  1. Sara says:

    Almost as maddening are the posts after the column shouting their agreement.

  2. skapusniak says:

    Umm, I notice that there, is a link to the Torygraph. 

    I’m not going there, whatever you Smart Bitches say!  I’ve not lived 33 years here in .uk without learning to avoid obvious hazards to my sanity. 

    Okay, in a life or death choice between the foaming at the mouth induced by the Telegraph and the crawling horror that is the Daily Mail, I confess I would plump for the Torygraph. But, I’m feeling afraid, very very afraid here…

    *Hesitantly clicks the More, More link*

    OH MY GOD, whatever it’s is it’s by Boris Johnson MP.  I’m not TOUCHING THIS.

    *runs away screaming into the night*

  3. megan says:

    None of this makes any sense.

    “a girl can still get her bodice ripped without the bodice ripper being locked up.”

    My brain can’t even process this; its so freaking non-sensical.  I’m not understanding why the bodice ripper would go to jail unless he was a rapist.  In which case, the woman is not going to enjoy stories about rapists not being punished. 

    Sadly, I found this almost as offensive to men.  He implies in that last statement that all real men are either thugs or wimps.  And that if a guy does well in school he must in fact be an effiminate guy.

    And finally:  Women aren’t competitive?  Really?  Because me and the top 5 people in my high school who also happened to be girls were extremely competitive while the guys sat around going, “Huh? What?”

  4. Miri says:

    Quote from the article aka: steaming pile,
    I am afraid we want to thrash the other guy, in a way that girls, being less aggressive, do not. If you take away those twin incentives, hope and fear –

    hope and fear huh I always though a schoolboys incentives were two other twins.
    I do agree that this “columnist” did a greater disservice to his own sex than he did to mine.

  5. Candy says:

    skapusniak: I had no idea who this Boris Johnson was before reading this article. I’m still somewhat clueless now, but I do know this: he’s a tool.

    Megan: Yes, Johnson basically reduces everything very neatly into “wussy womanish wishy-washiness” (is an affinity for alliteration also a feminine trait?) and “manly chest-beating glory.” He basically argues from a bankrupt masculist position: that men are no longer men, they’ve been hideously damaged by feminization, etc. etc. while ignoring the damage done to men who didn’t fit the manly male mold in days of yore.

  6. lovelysalome says:

    Ow ow ow ow ow!  That Tory trash is upsetting the delicate balance of my humours!

  7. Pile of stupid is putting it kindly.

    Women aren’t agressive.
    Women cooperate while men compete.
    We need to let boys behave like testesterone maniacs so they’ll read.

    It can’t be that women are smarter and stronger than men, oh no. We must blame the educational system.

    I have but one comment fot the sad, inadequate misogynistic minds that came up with this rambing, inane, nonscientific sexist, ignorant claptrap.

    Suck my dick.

    Thank you. I will now go iron something like a good girl. Like that guy’s face.

  8. Robin says:

    Actually, Boris is a little late to this party.  The arguments about how education is now biased against boys has been around for a while.  Witness the following Atlantic article:  http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200005/war-against-boys

    Here’s a different view from the Washington Post:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/07/AR2006040702025.html

    (I’m sorry, Candy, would you save these URL’s from my techno-incompetence?)

    NOT that this makes it any better, but I think his article is really more about what he sees as a problem with boys than about girls.  Yes I understand the denigrating stereotyping that such an argument entails and promotes, but there really does seem to be a cultural anxiety that boys are in trouble, educationally speaking.

    Anti-feminist backlash or changing gender politics?

  9. Keziah Hill says:

    Ah, that hoary old chestnut, the sad decline of educational standards for boys. They suffer so badly by having to compete with girls don’t they?

    The thing that really irritates me about this argument is that if boys are doing so badly compared to girls, this, by now, should be reflected in the numbers of women in senior management and corporate positions. But look! It has no effect! Funny that!

    Women are doing better than men in losts of areas of academic study and not much is changing in terms of the makeup of corporate and government leadership. There are all sorts of reasons for this (the lack of attractiveness of that world being one so that women can be less interested in succeeding in a world that fragments personal and public life) but I can’t work out why men think the eduction system is failing them (although it was always failed some group of men as it has women). White middle class men still inherit the world.

  10. Laura V says:

    Boris Johnson is Shadow Higher Education Minister (as mentioned already, he’s a Conservative MP). He’s also had at least one very high-profile affair, so perhaps that’s got some bearing on his attitude towards Flashman.

    Here’s the Wikipedia entry for him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Johnson

  11. fiveandfour says:

    Ayyyy!  Nothing like a little Friday afternoon stupidity to get me headed into the week-end all a twitter.  That logic train jumped the tracks and kept right on goin’, didn’t it? 

    I’m now thinking of something I heard in a seminar yesterday, which I love: “It is not really possible to plan for all levels of paranoia.”  It is some kind of paranoia that guy’s demonstrating (among other things) if he actually believes the end of western society as he knows it is due to the education of females.  Because, really, isn’t that the heart of his complaint?  Females are now enfolded into the realm of education and as a result a few changes were made to accommodate them, and ever since it’s all gone to hell for the boys? 

    Give me a break.

  12. Candy says:

    Robin: I think it’s pretty much symptomatic of some beliefs held by certain sectors of the masculist movement, which are angry at what they perceives as that damn mob of (scribbling?) women taking over. As the Washington Post article points out, there isn’t really a crisis, and if there is one, it seems to run more along class and race lines, not gender lines.

    When people start panicking and talking about what sissy-boys their kids have become, I take it as a sign of old age. People seem to love about three things as they get older:

    1. What is up with music nowadays? Man, that music sucks. Nobody makes music like they used to.

    2. What is up with movies nowadays? Man, these new movies suck. Nobody makes movies like they used to.

    3. What is up with our kids today? The boys aren’t as manly, and the women are freakish and not at all like the perfectly-behaved ladies of my youth.

  13. Marianne McA says:

    It is, you know, Boris Johnson.

    I know it’s a fallacy to take into account who is making the argument, but in this case you probably should.

    As Robin says, it’s a bit of a topic in the media in general at the moment – whether education is meeting the needs of boys, and that’s a fair question to ask.

    Referring to what someone said somewhere, when I trained as a teacher in the UK 20+ years ago, there was an assumption at my teacher training college that men wouldn’t teach infants – I’m not sure it was as concrete as a rule, they just weren’t given the opportunity to make that choice.

    We could always talk about Boris’s well thought through views on Liverpool next…

  14. Holy quilting circle, those dastardly and always peakly masculine british gents have FOUND US OUT.

    Our plot to infiltrate the schools and emasculate the poor trapped boy-children before their balls even drop is no longer a secret.

    Curses, foiled again.

  15. SandyO says:

    The more things change the more they stay the same. 😉  When I was in college back in the early ‘70’s, the debate was going on as to whether women could compete in the Ivy League schools.  (This was when Harvard, etc were going co-ed). “Experts” feared women would shrink back and allow the male students to do the debates. 

    They never investigated the non-Ivy League schools (go Boise State) and saw me, the little shrinking violet, in a shouting match with a guy in American Political Theory class. 🙂

  16. Kay says:

    We women have been getting mighty uppity since we learned to read and ‘rithmetic, subjegating men and thereby forcing ourselves to turn to fiction to find a good man. I know that I often find myself lamenting the loss of men willing to rip my bodice from my quivering breasts.

    I still don’t see the correlation between men not reading and women reading more, but who am I?

    Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go read some Clive Cussler and touch myself.

  17. lovelysalome says:

    Sounds like a fun time, Kay, except for the Cussler!

  18. Marianne McA says:

    Probably giving this too much thought time, but I tried to look up the stats. On the survey I found, reading was the fourth most popular activity with girls (43%) and computer gaming was the fourth most popular activity with boys (38%). Girls play distinctly fewer computer games than boys, and tend to choose different types of games.

    I’m wondering – and why I’m wasting my time wondering about it, I’m not sure – how Boris would enlarge his theory to accommodate the sort of images of masculinity and femininity typical of the different types of computer games girls and boys choose to play.

  19. Lady T says:

    I don’t know what’s scarier,the fact that this bloke feels the need to share such ignorance with the world or the number of commentors that agree with him at the website!

    I adore England but methinks this chap needs a good,strong dose of an SUTH(Smack Upside The Head)from one of us meek lil’ American gals:)

  20. Candy says:

    Hey, Marianne, if those stats can be found on the Internets, could you post a link? I’d be interested to see the complete lists of interests for both girls and boys.

  21. tisty says:

    Wow, makes you think doesn’t it. Who knew I had all that education advantage over boys back in the good old days when i was trying to learn stuff? Pity I didn’t know it then when I, and many of the male/female kids in the same lowly socio-economic group as myself, were struggling through a school sysytem where it was money that seemed to equal brains! If only I’d known just how clever my female bits could make me. DOH.

    And Being raised in a largely all female house let me assure you that women are very agressive, competitive and inclind to poke out the eyes of people who piss them off.

    Like this dick wad

  22. GreyArt says:

    ::sigh:: I love you. Really. You say every thing I think, but WAY better than I could ever express. Would you mind very much standing on this pedestal I have erected for you in my living room?

  23. meardaba says:

    I think it’s called an inferiority complex. 

    PS.  I kind of think this is great.  I’m so totally taking over the world, one book at a time.  I am such a threat…

    Bwahahahahahaha.  Hahahahahahha.  Haaa.

  24. Beth says:

    I love that I am always referred to as “Slayer of Foley”. It just makes me feel so fuckin’ fierce.

    And I also think this Johnson guy has his knickers in a twist only because he is, not to put to fine a point on it, bad in bed. I daresay he’s probably a bedwetter, in fact. The chump.

  25. Robin says:

    I think it’s pretty much symptomatic of some beliefs held by certain sectors of the masculist movement, which are angry at what they perceives as that damn mob of (scribbling?) women taking over. As the Washington Post article points out, there isn’t really a crisis, and if there is one, it seems to run more along class and race lines, not gender lines.

    Personally, I think class is woefully unexamined in a lot of these analyses in the US context, although I also believe that religion is becoming a real dividing line, one which we are even less adept at dealing with than class (one of the reasons I think we avoid class is that it would force us to face the fact that we are basically abandoning some of our urban and rural communities to certain death while channeling what seem to be endless streams of resources internationally). 

    I think what has happened in this whole education and boys debate is that there is a conflation of concern over the idea that boys might be tuning out and turning off to school with backlashy fears that women are taking the lead in the human race.  So there’s this weird cultural entwining between gender anxieties and pedgagogical issues that blows itself out of proportion from the sheer amount of hot air the combination generates. I find the pedagogical and related cultural issues interesting, and wish they were disentangled from the backlashy stuff more often.

  26. CindyS says:

    Yep, I’m a dude.  I was a fierce knot of hope and fear in school.  Remember when the teacher would talk in general about the grades on the reports before passing them out.  How, some people really needed to get their shit together.  I would be terrified it was me and hopeful (on my knees praying) it wasn’t!

    I guess being competitive places me firmly in the ‘dude’ bin. 

    If I wasn’t so terrified of royally screwing up some kids for life I would say go and create your own friggin’ school for boys – Let us know how that works out.

    I don’t know about anyone else but I followed that wiki link and couldn’t stop laughing when I got to this:

    He returned to front Have I Got News for You in November 2005. He admitted on the show that he once tried to snort cocaine but sneezed and failed.

    Too funny.


  27. dl says:

    It’s definately steaming.

    I must be doing something wrong as a parent, because both our teen boys are avid readers.  Of course, the flip side. . . boys are much more likely to spend their leisure time playing X-box (nintendo, playstation 2, etc.) than girls.  Microsoft called here once begging for women product testers for X-box, they couldn’t find any females with playing experience.

    Some of the new research on physical development of the teenage brain is kinda interesting.  At 12 years old, the female brain is approximately 1 1/2 years ahead of the male brain.  This gap gradually decreases until they are close to equal in late high school, and the brain is physically mature at about 25 years old (what did insurance companies know?).  Newsweek had a great article about 2 years ago.

  28. Stephen says:

    It’s Boris Johnson. It’s supposed to raise your blood pressure, and nobody in England-land would expect it to be completely coherent. In person the lovable floppy-haired adulterer can barely hold a sentence together.

    I have some sympathy for his starting point. It is not that there are more women reading Tom Clancy than men reading Maeve Binchy, it’s that there are more women reading Tom Clancy than men reading Tom Clancy. I don’t know about you, but that suggests that we have a disfunctional society that is likely to head in the wrong direction, with a whole gender heading towards de-civilising itself. The thing is that boys whose fathers read may or may not read themselves. Boys whose fathers don’t read are very unlikely to read.

    The rest of the article wanders rapidly into incoherence and drivel, and Boris certainly has no answers to the issue that he highlights, but then nobody in this country would really expect him to.

  29. Hannah says:

    I would just like to apologise for my MP! I swear, we don’t even vote for him, but everyone is so Tory it’s not worth thinking about alternatives. On occasion he can be somewhat funny (like coming into one of our school assemblies drunk… what a legend).

    Anyhow, I agree with you. It’s ridiculous to suppose that just because the schools are being adjusted to suit the other half of their population everything is now being downgraded and made “feminine”.

    I’m still mildly furious that one of the commenters had the nerve to say that if women were in control we’d still be in caves. The man obviously has no idea what women can do!

  30. lovelysalome says:

    I read an article a few years ago that suggested a causal relationship between the start of ESPN as a 24-sports channel – what, 1980 or so? – and the decline in males (men and boys) who enjoyed reading as a passtime.  ESPN and sport – not opinions about books, not political debate – became this era’s vocabulary for recreational competition between men.  My husband loves reading, but when he first immigrated here from England, he felt obligated to learn American football just to fit in at work.  His peers talked of little other than sports, and this is the environment in which boys are being raised.  The sooner society sheds its fascination with doped-up gladiators, the better :-S

  31. anonymous says:

    OT: Sarah Lawrence College hasn’t gotten rid of grades, exactly, but it has a whimsical, “let’s-not-mention-them-ever” attitude toward the pesky little things. And rather than exams, Sarah Lawrence has papers, endless assigned papers—you are constantly writing papers & essays & standing beofre the class delivering reports. The odd thing is, you do get a grade in your classes. Really, you do. But the grades aren’t sent home every semester; they’re kept on record at the Registrar’s Office, to be used if you apply to become a Rhodes Scholar or decide to transfer to some more pragmatic university that cares about such things, or apply to graduate school or for one of the many other institutions where they may not understand The Sarah Lawrence Way. Still, no GPA is ever calculated for you or for anyone; there’s no honor roll; there’s no valedictorian named, or any sort of class standing worked out. What you get, instead of grades, is a written-out, personal evaluation completed by each of your teachers, a pile of little personal essays, which gets mailed to you at the end of the semester. (Of course, what’s written in the evaluations shouldn’t be a surprise, because for each class, you get a private one-on-one meeting with your teacher every week, to discuss your progress in said class.) Used to be, at Sarah Lawrence, the only time you ever saw your grades was if you went up the creaky staircase in the Lawrences’ old mansion, down a dark hallway and into the three rooms that comprised the Registrar’s Office. If you asked the nice lady at the computer, she’d show you your grades. If you didn’t do this, you’d never know. You could go for the semester, or for the whole year, or for your entire college career, even beyond graduation, without ever knowing any of your grades.

    It was a delightful privilege to be educated in such a place, and I spent 10 years paying off my student loans for my time there, like a Biblical character enduring bondage to pay for freedom. And now, to propitiate my karma, I suppose, I hold a job in which I get half-year and full-year evaluations, using an automated online application known as the Alignment Tool, which is crammed to the gills with grades on everything from cooperation & time management to how I personally helped the company attain its quarterly profits.

  32. Candy says:

    Hey anonymous, thanks for explaining the Sarah Lawrence system in more detail. Very interesting to know. Definitely very different from the system I’ve been immersed in since, well, kindergarten. The people I know who’ve gone to Sarah Lawrence are also some of the scary-smartest people I know, so I don’t think de-emphasizing grades or getting rid of exams necessarily leads to degraded standards, as the article implies. But then, Sarah Lawrence alumni are a self-selecting sample….

  33. Cat Marsters says:

    *setting out targety for rotten vegetables*

    In true BJ fashion, he’s managed to bugger up the point.  The reasons women read are as varied as the reasons they chyoose schools, get married, buy cars and everything else.  But maybe, just maybe, some of us do want to read about square-jawed Alphas who can wrestle crocodiles and other sweaty, manly things.  Not every woman as he seems to imply, but some, for sure.  ‘Cos, you know, I don’t know many real blokes who can do that, do you?  A little bit of escapism is always nice.

    My brother, on the other hand, doesn’t need to read a book to find his perfect woman.  She’s skinny, blonde, eighteen, and thinks he’s God.  Depressingly, there appear to be hundreds of them.  Have these women no shame?  Don’t they know we’re better than all that?

    And as for the grades system, no, we haven’t abandoned it.  It’s middle of exam season here and every 16 and 18 year old in the country is in exam hell (extra hellish when you consider that in the exam halls, the curtains and windows are closed against distractions and it’s the middle of summer.  Go figure).  Exams are—or were when I left school a handful of years ago—just a smaller portion over the overall grade: coursework takes a percentage, too.

  34. Marianne McA says:

    Candy, as far as I can see it was this study.


  35. gigi says:

    Okay, I’m revealing my light-minded, bust-my-bodice femme-ness here, but instead of engaging the topic, I just had to say:

    Joyce Ellen, I’m now going to use the exclamation “Holy quilting circle” at least once a day.  I promise to cite you properly.  ROFLMAO!!

  36. Kaite says:

    To quote the inestimable Madeline Kahn in the movie “Clue”:

    “Anger…flames…flames on my face, fire….”

    Good frickin’ grief! I need a hit off my inhaler now. Why don’t you address the problems in your educational system that fail the x% of females as well as the x% of males? Not everyone learns the same way, you know, and it’s not only boys who get screwed over!

    And only a guy who never had to run the Female Inquisition of the Middle School Playground would ever have the temerity to say females weren’t competitive! Christ on a crutch, we’re bitches sometimes (and not in good ways, either!)

    One day, people will be allowed to be who and what they are, external traits be damned. I can only hope to be alive to see that day (although I’ll probably be very, very, very old. Like little old French lady old….) 🙂

  37. Jeri says:

    There’s nothing so cute as the argument that men are victims.  Really, it just makes me want to pinch their cheeks.

    My general rule is:  You can dominate, or you can complain, but you can’t do both.

    Are you white?
    Are you male?
    Are you straight?
    Do you have the use of all your limbs and major senses (smell doesn’t count)?

    Then stop yer bitchin’!

  38. lovelysalome says:

    I love Clue!  😆

  39. Cora says:

    So education nowadays is supposedly biassed against boys, just because it occasionally addresses subjects that interest more girls than boys? Well, tough luck. Because for years, it’s been the other way around with schools mainly assigning books that would appeal to boys rather than girls, math textbooks drawing the material for their tasks from a supposedly male rather than female experience and occasionally even downright sexist teachers. But now that things finally seem to become a little more balanced, the usual suspects start crying out that those poor little boys can’t cope with what many girls had to cope with for years.

  40. cassie says:

    I’m not sure if this is the correct place for this, but since the title of this post has to do with gender stereotypes, I think it has a small connection.

    It’s Joss Whedon’s Equality Now speech, which I think is great.

    Although, nothing against Joss, but I wonder why it takes a man to make this point.

Comments are closed.

By posting a comment, you consent to have your personally identifiable information collected and used in accordance with our privacy policy.

↑ Back to Top