This is from an article/book review of What Women Want: The Global Marketplace Turns Female Friendly, Liberation Impasse – Taking ambivalent measure of the legacy of modern feminism
Third-wave feminism was at its most compelling in its gamesome, confident presentation of the young female body—SLUT scrawled across the stomach; the combination of combat boots and baby-doll dresses. Baumgardner and Richards made the now-familiar case that women and girls can participate in consumer culture without becoming its victims. Barbie can be a figure on whom you practice giving abortions rather than a demon unleashed on the marketplace to sprinkle anorexia dust on infant girls. The market culture that envelops girls is theirs to manipulate and reclaim; it is, in the end, their culture, and it’s wrong to pretend they’ll be more whole without it.
This might be unfair in that I have nothing in particular to say or rather share about the passage. And those that want to read the whole – lengthy – article will have to register. There is a lot on the history of women’s cultural progress that leads up to the block quote.
Let Texas schoolchildren, as well, read the Confederate Constitution. It is surely the most bizarre constitution ever adopted. It is a copy of the U.S. Constitution, rewritten to cripple the central government. The Confederate Constitution bans the government of the new federation from spending money on infrastructure, with a few exceptions like harbors and lighthouses, and prevents the new government of the South from fostering industry.
With a central government that was deliberately weakened at its formation, how did the Confederacy expect to prevail in a war against the forces of the Union? The answer is that the rich oligarchy of slave lords who ruled the South hoped that the British empire would intervene to secure their region’s independence, just as France had intervened in the American Revolution to help the United States win its independence from Britain.
When the British declined the offer, the geniuses in charge of the Confederacy realized that they would have to win their independence with their own resources. This was no easy thing to do in a wannabe country that prided itself on its absence of factories and banks. But they tried anyway. They threw libertarianism overboard and mobilized for war. They instituted a draft. They passed an income tax and inflated the currency to push citizens into higher brackets. Lacking a native Southern capitalist class, they put generals and colonels in charge of government-owned factories and munitions plants.
I have actually read the entire “Text of Proposed Revisions to 19 TAC, Chapter 113. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Social Studies, Subchapter B. Middle School” (21 pages), or at least what part was published on-line a few weeks ago. In the abstract it’s not a bad set of goals. Like all such publications by school broads easier said than done. The writing and research requirements are near sophomore college level. The problem is much like what the far Right has done with modern political ideology – which includes a lot of revisionist history – is to mainstream abhorrent political points of view. Points of view, such as those of the Confederacy, as being simply a reasonable choice that one could make, but for gee, who really knows why, the forces of northern aggression got its way. As Lind notes they are not going to teach the truth about the Antebellum south, they’re going to let the students peddle around with it and cross your fingers fans of Lincoln, they’ll come to the only sensible conclusion. That scent in the air hanging over Texas is the smell of far Right moral relativism courtesy the school board.