Naomi Wolf talking crap again...

Her willingness to perpetuate rape myths and demand that Julian Assange’s accusers be stripped of their anonymity were disgraceful. It made me very happy to see so many Mumsnet posters tell her so in that webchat.

She’s not much of a feminist or a researcher and she’s somehow also become a chem trails conspiracy theorist. Her Twitter feed is full of photos of clouds with mutterings about how the sky used to be “natural”. Very strange.

Someone turned her books around on the shelf in Daunt today (so spines facing into the wall).

I'm reading it right now.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_live_events/a1556371-Naomi-Wolf-live-webchat-TODAY-Thursday-6-September-12pm-to-1pm
^I think the brain-vagina link is actually fascinating.
I think the arse-mouth link is also an area worthy of further research. Just how do some people come to talk out of their bottoms?^
Oh dear, the responses
I didn't know that she objected to the transfer of Assange back to Sweden to face rape charges.

I went to hear Wolf speak after The Beauty Myth came out, too. My only memory of it is that she complained about being photographed and and when she couldn’t remember her own argument she explained that it was because she was “so tired”.

Her second book, Fire With Fire, was atrocious. All about how hard it is to be a successful feminist author and contrasting “Power Feminists” (women like Naomi Wolf) with “Victim Feminists” (everyone else). Gave up on her after that.

I think her best work was her Mumsnet webchat. Certainly her funniest.

So does she think McKinnon is not real, and/or we in the UK , mostly women, are too dumb to use our own brains and have to be told what to think by some organisation most of us never heard of.

Just thrown the beauty myth into the recycling bin. Good riddance, dingbat.

A man's armpit sniffing woman, at least. If this is what happens to your brain if you do it a lot I think will pass, thanks.

A man’s woman then?

She is such a disappointment. I liked the Beauty Myth and went to hear her speak, she was very condescending to women in the audience when she took questions, and I have never had any time for her ever since.

Also, while I am here, Mike Lousada was at one point accredited as a psychotherapists with a fascinating organisation the Independent Practitioners Network

Either network of daring psychotherapists open to all kinds of innovative psychotherapeutic approaches, or a motley collection of sex cultist and new age grifters with immense skills for revenue generation (and intel harvesting) depending on your perspective.

Possibly a good place to find out more is this page (archived) of the IPN website

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20110718160433/i-p-n.org/Archive.htm" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">web.archive.org/web/20110718160433/i-p-n.org/Archive.htm

be careful

Naomi Wolf's adventures with sex cults are mentioned briefly in this article, for those who missed the article first time round.

www.theguardian.com/books/2012/sep/07/vagina-new-biography-naomi-wolf-review

There is a piece in the Times about Wolf's encounter with "sacred sexual healer" / "yoni massager" Mike Lousada but it is behind a paywall.

I just looked up a review of her book Vagina, which I remembered reading when it came out:

www.theguardian.com/books/2012/sep/07/vagina-new-biography-naomi-wolf-review

It's long, but worth a read, particularly the four paras starting "Back in 1990..." which include a mention of the time the reviewer had Wolf round for tea.

Actual experts, people who have spent decades doing diligent research for little reward usually, are being chucked under the bus whenever a celeb or charlatan (often both together) comes along with a product to promote.

And it is always the individual experts who have to defend themselves.

Institutions themselves (who you think would have a vested interested in protecting their expert status) never seem to back up the individuals. Because they are too cowardly. They're happy to use the experts in their marketing, exploit their labour, profit from their expertise and then abandon them completely whenever a woke-soaked charlatan turns up.

It is shameful.

The Communist Party are the only ones who are against transgender ideology

Very conservative, traditional, right-wingers are also against it, but for very different reasons.

It seems that those who decide that the facts must change to reflect their beliefs, rather than the other way round, drive themselves mad. Like is happening to Trump.

Putting it another way, when you turn your back on reality, it's likely you'll slip your moorings.

Yeah, it is a bit strange all round really.

Same with the whole UK feminists are in league with the right wing stuff she trots out.

The Communist Party are the only ones who are against transgender ideology, stating that it is bourgeois individualism that goes against the material reality and class analysis fundamental to Marxism.

For a woman who wrote a book about vaginas, she knows fuck all about vaginas too. No time for her. She's a daftie with a huge, powerful platform, total eejit.

It's very strange that initially she accepted, with seeming good grace, that she was wrong, and is now insisting that she was right all along - even though the evidence directly contradicts her. I do wonder if she's quite right in the head.

Is it possible that Wolf thinks that the word Victorian relates to the whole of the 19th century, rather than you know, the reign of Queen Victoria. Which started in 1837.

It is possible but would be an even more embarrassing error than the 'death recorded' one she appears to be doubling down on.

Why do people do this?

Naomi Wolf doubling down yesterday (presumably hoping to try to distract from the Titania McGrath drubbing).

twitter.com/naomirwolf/status/1179378790289563650

"In my interview w/ Dr H G Cocks, author of Nameless Offences: 8 THOUSAND arrests for sodomitical offences in 19th C; 7000+, a "dark figure" w/ no final outcomes; 55 executions recorded in Parliamentary records. @nytimes, @dcexaminer, BBC, pls correct whitewash of LGBTQ+ history".

Matthew Sweet, the person who corrected Wolf on air, defends himself again. With facts.

twitter.com/DrMatthewSweet/status/1179514213867409409

"Apologies again. This is becoming like that old British sketch they show on German TV every New Year. But again I seem to be accused of whitewashing history, and again I must lay out the facts, as this is a serious and damaging allegation. So..."

"But it's an established fact that the last execution of this kind took place in 1835. @Outrages insists, erroneously & emphatically, that they continued into the Victorian era. It is a key argument of the book, as published in the UK by @ViragoBooks. It is wrong".

Is it possible that Wolf thinks that the word Victorian relates to the whole of the 19th century, rather than you know, the reign of Queen Victoria. Which started in 1837.

The radio interview is one of the most glorious I've ever heard. Not in a good way for Naomi, but glorious none the less.

I can't decide whether that or Ben Shapiro accusing Andrew Neill of being a leftie was funnier.

Oh that radio interview

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🙈🙈🙈🙈🙈🙈🙈🙈🙈🙈🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Y’see normally I’d be all girly and feminine, and feel sorry for someone talking bollocks and getting caught out on national radio. But nah...

It appears that Wolf is now trying to rehabilitate her book, you know, the one where she was humiliated on BBC Radio over the embarrassing mistakes it contained:

twitter.com/naomirwolf/status/1179378790289563650

" which featured the idea that women must smell men's armpits to be calm and happy."

I doubt she has researched that one either