I posted the following comment on Jessica Roy’s Time Magazine article. In it she reports on the conference I attended in Detroit last weekend. Find her piece here.
One has to wonder if the author is acquainted with the “darker side” or the “ugly head” of the Women’s Issues movement (i.e. feminism) and their spokeswomen. [the SCUM manifesto for starters, which has a 3.5 star average on Amazon and wherein reviewers ask us to believe its kill-all-men theme is “satire.”]
Jessica Roy (a lover of “cats, Beyoncé and exploring the depths of the Internet for the weirdest stuff she can find”) says that at the conference she felt “sad and angry and helpless and determined.” After reading her piece it’s beyond me what she’s determined to do (other than finding more than JUST the Internet trolls her subhead insinuates she actually did find).
Again, has Roy ever scrutinized the “extreme corners” (i.e. that darker side and ugly head) of so-called Women’s Rights (aka Feminism’s “Fringe”)?
While I am one of Jessica’s “small number of women,” that “small fraction” – she likes repeating herself – I’m neither “vitriolic” nor “fearful,” nor did I find any of the dozens of male attendees I spoke face-to-face with to be like that either, and that’s saying a lot considering the legal-wringers a couple of them have been put through by women. As a reporter for a major news outlet, Ms. Roy really ought to have a broader (intended respectfully, not pun-ily) vocabulary. If she – or any other media representative – had spoken with me (though I was only there 3:30pm Thursday through 8:00pm Saturday) what would have come across would not have been virulence. There is a grand canyon of difference between the righteous-indignation I feel and the term she uses, “vitriol,” just as there is a similarly sized gap between the thoughtful men in attendance exhibiting a rational & reasoned cautiousness (around women in particular) versus Roy’s nebulous label, “fear.”
As a writer myself, I understand that not only does the craft depend on “what the meaning of ‘is’ is,” it depends on the fine distinctions of so many other words as well.