So I know we have the Quote of the Day that doesn’t happen every day. And the two-clause post titles. And the posts that have nothing to do with the link or book or song or whatever that supposedly inspired them. And your twice- or thrice-weekly dose of The Latest Random Fact Related to Gay Male Writers. And Princtoniana ad nauseam. But what we don’t have are links! And lots of them!
Those of you who are my Facebook friends probably get your news feeds inundated with the links I post to Facebook several times a day. But not all of you are my Facebook friends, not all of you use Facebook, some of you probably removed me from your news feeds long ago because of ALL THOSE LINKS, and so every week (or, okay, probably not every week, but when I remember) I’m going to post a round-up of all the links I thought interesting enough to point out over the course of the week, with their original comments included. Without further ado, I present this week’s links!
- And people wonder why I love the Chronicle Review so very much. Reader, it’s because of things like this.
- Oh Towleroad. You really know how to write an entertainment headline.
- I feel like this article isn’t one of the Crimson‘s better products.
- Yay Canada!
- Lolz.
- This is a rather funny article that I would be quite interested to hear thoughts on. I mean, bravo to the BBC for running it, but. Obviously gay men are prone to sexism and misogyny just like anyone is, and historically gay culture has often been quite sexist. But I’d argue that manifests itself in different ways than the ones this article suggests. This article is suggesting that the jokes Norton or the general public make are homophobic, not sexist—at least, that’s my reading. And anti-lesbian homophobia is not something I’ve ever experienced from gay men, so I’m rather surprised to see it raised here. I mean, Graham Norton is also rather ridiculous. Is it specious (my new favorite word) of the Beeb writer to insinuate that he speaks for all gay men?
- Celebrate Banned Books!
- This is a bizarre and rather troubling story.
- YES.
- I can’t wait for this book!
- I think this is probably in the top five things I’ve ever read in the Prince. I don’t agree with every word of it, but it’s well-argued and the prose is good. The last sentence especially.
- Any chance some professor could take up the cause and import this class to Princeton?
- This is interesting, but I’d add that gender and gender roles play just as important a part as religion. I think there’s a pattern in conservative woman activists of inconsistency between the women’s gender roles they preach and the extent to which they themselves exemplify those gender roles. Phyllis Schlafly is another example that springs to mind.
- … and at Princeton? This article calls Dartmouth “the conservative Ivy,” but everything about its campus culture suggests that it’s, if not sex-positive, at least much less sex-negative than Princeton’s. At Dartmouth, it seems like sexuality and sex-positivity has a visibility that it simply doesn’t have at Princeton. Happily, there are folks here working to change that. Bit by bit, folks. Bit by bit.
- Hair is one of my favorite cultural phenomena ever. That said, I think it’s interesting how marriage equality is the new “radical chic.” Do we think that’s what it means to be a hippie or a radical leftist in 2009?
- This doesn’t sound good…
- The Princeton crime report is one of my favorite things ever.
- Can I just say how much I love Big Bird? Also the FLOTUS, but mostly Big Bird.
- Historiann does a good job of highlighting the interesting passages from the interview in question.
- This is great—particularly the footnote—and the comments are just as good.
- Whoa. Oh academic freedom, you are a cruel mistress.
- Hey check it out: there might be jobs in Australia!
- I didn’t have the head for numbers to do more than skim this, but maybe some of you do. Thoughts?
Emily Rutherford 