The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichelle Malkin Archive
This Is What Feminism Looks Like
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This is what feminism looks like: Bitter, clingy, and effete.

Oh, sorry, Mizzzz Erbe. Didn’t mean to spew my venom all over yours:

Teri Christoph, whom I have never met, asked me to stand up for conservative women who were maligned by an online article on Playboy magazine’s website. The article has since been taken off the site, but the gist of it was, indeed, disgusting, sexist, of course pornographic, and demeaning to conservative women. The article contained a list of conservative female media commentators whom the author said men would like to, er, have sex with but hate at the same time, or something nonsensical like that. Ms. Christoph sent me a link to a cached page of the now-removed article.

…I also want to note that at least one woman on the list is so venom-spewing, she unfortunately invites venom to be shot back at her: Michelle Malkin. Her posts and her “routine” are so venomous and predictable, in fact, I stopped paying attention to her years ago.

Others on the list, however, are not venom-spewing at all. One woman mentioned on the atlasshrugs2000 blog is a regular guest on my PBS show. Amanda Carpenter, on the show at least, eschews personal judgment of people with whom she disagrees politically. So her inclusion on the Playboy list is much more offensive to me than is the inclusion of Ms. Malkin, although their political views may not differ greatly.

Translation: It’s not okay to talk about “hatef**king” conservative women…unless they are rowdy, incivil conservative women who don’t behave nicely enough to be on my obscure PBS show. In which case, they deserve all the vulgar misogynist attacks they get!


The comments on Erbe’s post are priceless. I’m sure I’ll be blamed for all the “venom” commenters have been “spewing” there before I even linked it. Heh.


Venom fantasy

So Erbe states she stopped paying attention to Malkin “years ago” but is convinced Malkin spews venom and therefore should expect this type of thing. So you don’t actually read her commentary but just know she is vile. Sort of like how Harry Reid has never read any of Sotomayor’s opinions, but just knows she is awesome ( Got it. No facts or evidence needed here.


Ms. Erbe, Kindly Do Us All a Favor Next Time …

some conservative group naively sends you an e-mail asking you to support them, and have your IT people place their domain in your spam folder. That way you don’t even have to see their request, much less feel compelled to offer the group your “support.” (While you’re at it, maybe you could see about having them block us people who were directed here from “right wingnut” sites, so you don’t even have to read comments like mine).


You’ll be doing yourself a favor, too. Based on the comments on this story I’ve read on various sites from your fellow leftists, I’m certain that over 90 percent of your typical readers feel that every woman on that list “had it coming” just like you feel that Michelle Malkin did, and that a number of them may even feel that they would be asking for an actual, physical rape because of their conservative political views. By offering this kind of tepid, conditional “support” for the enemy, all you’re doing is alienating and confusing your reader base.

Since you’ve already given conservatives the back of your hand, who will be left to read your columns if you drive away the liberals?


US Snooze…

“As a nonpartisan, pro-abortion, liberal Democrat, I was perfectly happy with the leftwing misogynist haters at Playboy talking about how they would rape Michelle Malkin…”

No wonder I wasn’t aware that U.S. News was still in circulation; your columnists are just as bad/irrelevant as they used to be.



It’s this kind of twisted faux-“independence” and faux-concern-for-women that made me stop watching To The Contrary.

Given an opportunity to stand up for all women, even those Erbe disagrees with, Erbe instead chooses to use the opportunity to attack Malkin and imply she ‘deserved it’. Awful.

And if you’re going to made such an awful accusation – again implying Malkin would deserve to be hate-f***-ed, how about including some piece of accusatory evidence? What exactly has she written that’s so “venomous”? Of course Erbe has no ability to do so, and admits her own ignorance of anything Malkin’s done – to quote, “I stopped paying attention to her years ago”.



Wow. Malkin’s inclusion is less offensive to you because she does not eschew personal judgment of people with whom she disagrees politically. Go home tonight and sip some green tea, stroke your cat, close your eyes and try to reflect (if you can) on the sublime irony of that statement.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Double standards, Playboy, Unhinged