Skepchick Quickies 6.3


Amanda works in healthcare, is a loudmouthed feminist, and proud supporter of the Oxford comma.

Related Articles


  1. Okay, so just to show how screwed up my mind is, when I read the “Hedgehog discovery holds clues for cancer treatment”. I thought, what does Ron Jeremy have to do with cancer research, D’oh!

  2. So what is the “like-cures-like” substance that homeopaths are using to cure teh gay? Doesn’t that “like-cures-like” substance need to be different for gay men and lesbians?

    On second thought, maybe I don’t want to know.

  3. Well, of course no woman is the literary “equal” of V.S. Naipul… none of the women writers I’ve read (or read interviews by/with) have his ego, not even Stephenie “I’ll revise it in interviews after the fact” Meyer. Also, the one truthful thing he said about women’s mastery of their house; it’s hard to craft a literary masterpiece when first one has to complete one’s day job, scrub the bathrooms, vacuum the floor, prepare meals, take care of children if any are under one’s charge, etc.

    Then again, we don’t make schoolchildren read V.S. Naipul, but we often make them read Lois Lowry and Jane Austen, and they read J.K. Rowling on their own.

    Just saying.

    1. Let’s not forget Toni Morrison…a black woman (2 Naipaul strikes against her!) and a Nobel winner herself who I’ve read in class from high school through college. That must really not sit well with him.

      1. Fair point. For whatever reason, I never had to read Morrison; it’s possible she was one of the options on a “choose two off this list” requirement, but now I wonder if it was an accident on my teacher’s part… a sort of benign neglect, if you will.

    1. I guessed on every one and didn’t recognize any of the quotes and got 9 out of 10.

      When I say I guessed, I don’t mean I read the quote and thought ‘man’ or ‘woman.’ I didn’t even read the quotes, I just guessed.

      Naipaul can kiss my ass.

    2. HAHA when I showed up here I was going to be all excited that this is a testable claim, but I see some brilliant people have already set up the test! Win.

    3. I tried to make guesses based on perceived stereotypes of male/female genders, and got 6/10. Also: apparently, I need to read more books by men. *snerk*

  4. More creationist BS from the another fundamentalist? The old “show me a transitional fossil” argument is getting old. One might as well show them a dead parrot nailed to its perch for all the good it will do.

  5. I got 7 out of 10. They were a little short. Sometimes I can tell (or I think I can) the gender of someone from what they write. Sometimes my idea is wrong. Usually I can tell someone’s gender by looking at them (or I think I can).

    Being able to tell someone’s gender by how that person writes is not a reflection on the inherent value of the writing.

    Usually I can tell if someone is a douche by their writing easier than by what they look like. If someone is a douche, it does lessen the value of their writing for me. I won’t be reading any of Naipul’s writing, life it too short to read work by douches and have to be especially careful that any of his doucheyness doesn’t make it through my cognitive firewall.

  6. Homeopathic “gay cure”… I think that is beautiful. It is so backward and insane, it is a work of art. I have a hard time seeing this as anything other than a work of modern art.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button