I'll be your Huckleberry

| | Comments (48)

I'm not a perfect Christian. I'm a mess, really, as are most. I know this. I don't walk around with a makeshift halo over my head.

I also know that when you say that you have faith, you're supposed to hold yourself to a higher standard; otherwise, it's a bait and switch. This is my problem with most religion; its why I'm non-denominational, it's why whenever I see people like Benny Hinn or Pat Robertson on television pointing down to everyone with their shepherd's staff that I go berserk.

I very much feel like dumping over the changing tables in the temple and shouting "DEN OF ROBBERS!" in their faces.


My friend Catherine wrote a post on the pop-culture blog to which I contribute, about the New York Times' Blogher kerfuffle. It was emotionally-charged, from the heart, and downright angry. I can empathize as I myself have been on the receiving end of viciously sexist email, comments, et al. before from both men and women (Jessica Valenti). A man's hobbies or interests (i.e. baseball) are not used to invalidate his work, yet the same courtesy is not extended to women. It's unfortunate that entities like the NYT feel that in order to merit the same consideration as men, women essentially have to disregard their femininity and become men.

I'm not angry at the NYT article's author for incorporating female interests into the piece at all; rather, I'm angry that the NYT interpreted those interests as fluff and stuck it into into a fluff section which runs pieces about Botox.


The ripples of this extended all the way over to World Net Daily, whose columnist by the pseudonym of Vox Day (seriously, I think there were like 20 of those pseudonyms back in my junior high AOL chatroom days) - excuse me - Christian columnist Vox Day (real name Theodore Beale; he's a rich kid and his dad was on the board at WND, which undoubtedly helped Beale to get some ink) decided to go on a rant against women with emphasis on mothers who blog and basically called us all stupid. I realize that intelligence is probably very important to a man who works "I'm in Mensa" in every biographical footnote and pick-up lines, all the while juxtaposing it next to a standard Myspace headshot replete with a hairstyle and goatee sported by every teenage male member of my Ozark family.

Now see, that was cruel. It was as shallow and tasteless as the arguments Vox Day/Theodore Beale presented against women bloggers and for that I am ashamed. Really.

(Tangent: Some time ago I read wherein Beale apologized to national socialists for further disparaging their already-besmirched name with the "femi-nazi" sobriquet. I would go so far as to say Day is acting like a "manazi." That would be an excellent metal album title.)

My other problem with Beale is a repeat of what I mentioned in my earlier graphs: I don't walk around with a makeshift halo over my head. However, Beale apparently does. This is a guy that advertises all the Christian books he's reading or has written, a guy who opines about politics and the merits of Christianity in his World Net Daily columns; this is a guy who positions himself in an authoritative role with regards to spirituality, a guy who lectures us on the importance of faith. So forgive me if I find it a little contradictory when he calls someone I know, a genuinely real and good person, a "lactating cow."

You don't speak to someone about their concern for sexism by writing about them like a sexist.

I should point out that this was on his Blogger site and not on the World Net Daily site, otherwise that probably wouldn't help sell books, I'd imagine.

He goes on to say how women marginalize themselves because of "hate and animosity." I don't disagree with this statement, yet he misses the irony completely. 

Why does this bother me? I try not to embarrass myself or my faith too much which can be really difficult for me because I have a notoriously sharp tongue and I feel that bluntness expediency in speech is more efficient. I realize that when I say I am a person of faith that I am representing a lot more here on earth than just myself. I try hard to avoid becoming like that which I detest: people like Benny Hinn and his ilk, people who praise God on Sunday but betray Him with their actions on Monday.

Talking about how spiritually righteous you are while at the same time eviscerating others does nothing to improve the stereotype that some have of Christians. It makes it harder for people to publicly admit their faith. It gives more ammunition to the jerks in high school that make fun of the kid on his way to a meeting of Christian Athletes.

"The salient point is that I understand that this blog exists for me and me alone. I have no right to demand that anyone read it or recognize it or pay any attention to it whatsoever ..."

I whole-heartedly agree. No one has the right to be read. It is not a right; it is a privilege. I'm sure Vox just sticks his blog's link in the footnote of his columns for kicks and grins. With a blog being created every second, there are a lot of bad writers out there. (There are a lot of good ones as well.) Vox Day/Theodore Beale believes that women bloggers are demanding attention, traffic, eyeballs. Perhaps Beale's zeal got ahead of his knowledge on this one: that's not what was said in the slightest. All that was said was that women in technology would like to be treated with the same consideration as are the men. It's interesting to me: Beale considers unfair treatment important when discussing matters of religion or politics; perhaps he discounts women because he's a male and therefore can't identify with some of what's being discussed?

He doesn't think women - mother bloggers - are important? At least he condescendingly gives Catherine credit for breeding. So kind of you, Vox.

" ... readers ignore you ["chick-bloggers and mommy-bloggers"] because they could not possibly care less about nothing, which just happens to be what you have to say."

I'm not going to debate with him the importance of motherhood or how I believe women are responsible for directing society's trajectory because we rock the cradle and all of that; also because I believe that his statement suggests a total disrespect of females, whether or not he intended it, or how I (and most women) didn't clamor for attention - it just happened. Women write about "nothing." His heart is hardened and that's all she wrote.

I want to take issue with a few comments:

"They value attention more than what they do."

Universal statements are logically unsound. I can't speak for everyone, but I write online because I enjoy it, it helps me work through things, but most importantly, I have a living diary of my life with my children. I'd forget half of this without typing it up. Also important - I've connected with other mothers. I've found a groundswell of homeschooling resources and support. So please keep your armchair psychology to yourself.

"I mean, who is supposed to be surprised, let alone upset, that groups of narcissistic women like to babble at each other and tell each other how wonderful they are? I'd only be surprised if I learned they were doing anything that was either useful or entertaining."

It's the exact same as a bunch of Dungeons and Dragons nerds sitting around in Vox's mom's basement, drinking the Kool-Aid, combing their goatees and talking about how much they hate women. OK. That was mean. See? It takes work, ya'll.

He commented later:

"I'm all for Mommy blogs. I'm sure there's [sic] plenty of companies selling kids stuff that would like to use them as advertising vehicles. But hearing them complain about not being taken seriously is like listening to Jenna Jameson complain that she's never been nominated for an Oscar. It's a category error."

Vox Day had an opportunity to be the salt he preaches about. It's unfortunate that he instead chose to embrace the very characteristics he claims are hallmarks of those with whom he disagrees.

He generalizes mothers who write online, discounts those who have skills what - because they have kids? - and compares them to the skankiest of porn stars (whose boyfriend is the worst fighter in the UFC).

"No one starts with any [respect]. You want it, you earn it."

No. Everyone is deserving of respect until otherwise proven. Have you even read the Bible which you thump so hard? NONE of us have earned respect, yet, by faith, we are saved.

(Again, I'm not a preacher, I don't like thumping, but that right there was one of the most dangerous statements I've ever read from a self-proclaimed Christian in a long time.)

I don't even have to write anything insulting about him other than to let his quotes speak for themselves. Please do not allow this guy to stand as an example of those with faith.


(P.S. The comment thing is misleading, you do not have to sign in. Just hit "comment anonymously and fill in your URL, etc. Sorries. I'll fix it.)

*UPDATE: Reader Barbara writes:

I read your blog about Vox Day/Theodore Beale. I checked the online up-to-date membership roster, and he wasn't listed. I then emailed the office of American Mensa, Ltd., and they do not have him listed as a member, either...under either name.

Anyone, not just a member, can receive confirmation of someone's membership by emailing membership@us.mensa.org.

**UPDATE DEUX: Vox responded like the last kid picked for dodgeball. So typical. And sad! It's not even fun to pick on him because he's one of those people perpetually ON THE RAG and intellectually stunted. I've read him before and stopped because there were other, better political and religious writers out there who didn't depend on daddy to get them their columns (note how he sidesteps that whole issue). You got pwned. GET OVER IT. Good game, now move on. Actually, I'm just interested in seeing how many posts he makes attacking women. It's hysterical.

Also - if you post a comment you are required to leave a valid email address. I immediately delete without reading any comment that lacks one. I do not publish email addresses but I refuse to engage in conversations with "anonymous" people. I have the courage to put a name with my convictions, if you expect to have a discussion on my website you are required to do the same. Thank you.

Final update: I took it upon myself to email Vox personally. He has a lot to learn and he needs to stop blaming all of humanity for his own inability to function in the world. Finis.



Although the FACT of his sex (that he is a man, in some ways) wouldn't have anything to do with whether or not he discounts women. I hope. I don't feel like I'm fighting or resisting my sex when I say the things I do.

No, it's the FACT that he's sophist that makes him discount women: he already knows everything he'll ever want to know, and now his job is to make sure that everyone who argues against whatever principles he embraces gets poked with little rhetorical flourishes. He LOVES to preach to his choir, and his posts are rhetoric.

The more people like this talk (write) the more they just hang themselves with their words.

The sad thing is there are people that agree with him. (And those people suck. I'm just sayin'...)

Whoa whoa, wait. You got sexist email from Jessica Feministing.com Valenti?

Please tell me more. I am totes intrigued.

Thank you, Dana.

Love the title; love the post.

Amen, sister. We Christians can often be our own worst enemy, and this...let's just say "nozzle"...proves just that. Whatever ground are you hoping to gain when you present your faith as something so short-sighted, intolerant, and downright IGNORANT? Gee, I'd want to join THAT club! There's a church for uninformed, closed-minded bigots? Sign me UP! Sheesh.

Going right now to give thanks for my own church community, especially my pastor, who would dismiss such writing out of hand.

You, my dear, are a treasure, and a credit to women, Christians, and, well, just humanity.

I was really surprised to see how old this guy is. Reading his post, I figured he was some early 20s frat boy, not someone old enough to have an established career (and receding hairline). He's seriously been able to live this long while spouting that kind of nonsense?

His argument lost any minuscule shred of validity it might possibly have had with the "lactating cow" comment. Seriously, dude? You're in MENSA and that's the best you can come up with?

And as a "clown of reason", I can say he does nothing to put faith or religion in a positive light. I think he's WAY more "irrational" than I am.

I struggled to read his post as it made me very angry and very sad. I agree that that everyone has an opinion but calling a very nice woman names while claiming he is 'oh so much better' - well it does make you want to dole out a tongue lashing. BTW - beautifully written.

"Faith." Something you have to prove you possess every day of your life or somebody is going to take you down for it. You know, I didn't click any of the links in your blog. No need. I understand the type without having to have proof texts plastered in my face. And I really don't care to debate the gender issue. My wife is a much better person than I am and I would cast my vote for her gender gladly.

The term "dysfunctional" is actually under used these days. The author of the writings you mention is dysfunctional. So am I. So is my church. So is every church I've ever been a part of. And if I find one that isn't dysfunctional it will become dysfunctional when I show up.

I guess, as a pastor, as a guy, as a fallen and screwed-up human being I'm just looking for someone who is doing it right so that I can follow him. I mean, I'm no longer surprised by the dysfunction of any person or any institution. Especially those of us who write. I mean, what makes me think that I have words that will come to anybodies rescue? And then I remember that there was one that was not dysfunctional. He was very functional indeed. And yeah, they killed Him for it. Nailed to the old tree. For you who are not people of faith let me go ahead and admit that His name is Jesus. You can squeal now and get it over with. It's just that after many years of running through life and throwing the proverbial penalty flag at the feet of so many "leaders" I realize the vanity of it all. So as you said, "I don't even have to write anything insulting about him ..." I'd much rather spend my time pursuing the One who did it right than waste time arguing with those who don't/didn't.

Now that was a sermon. I encourage you to consider not posting this comment. But somebody take an offering and let's go home.

just more proof that Mensa accepts its members by raw intellect, not by having common sense or the ability to reason.

Mommyblogger, chick lit, lactating cow--call me what you will, dude. I don't need your ilk.

I will have to go back and read this when I have more time to reflect and comment intelligently. In the meantime, I just have to say well done. I almost feel like I should smoke a cigarette or something after reading that. :)

Not to make light of your post, but as my mom so wisely told me many a times, people like this just aren't worth the trouble. Unfortunately, I think you just gave Vox exactly what he wanted -- a reaction.

As a Christian, I see nothing "Christ-like" regarding this "Christian libertarian opinion columnist" and his views.

One thing that I have always loved about Jesus is that His love for women is evident all throughout the gospels. Now that I’m a mom, I especially appreciate his love for moms. Think about it: His first miracle (turning water into wine) in John 2:1-11 was performed at the request of a mom (His mom). One of only two people who Jesus commended for having “great faith” in the Gospels was a mom. In Matthew 15:21-28, she was the faithful Canaanite woman who came to Jesus in order for Him to heal her suffering, demon-possessed daughter. My favorite mom/Jesus interaction is the widow’s son who Jesus raised at Nain(in Luke 7:11-17). This is the first time that Jesus performed the miracle of raising someone from the dead. It’s no surprise to me that He did so in response to a mother’s tears.

I know that this comment is a little (ok, a lot!)long, but it just written to show that anyone who spitefully attacks moms are definitely NOT following in Jesus' steps!

*mouth opening and closing*

I don't even know where to begin with that guy's comments. My first reaction is rage. But you know, he shows so little human empathy, that I wouldn't be surprised if he has a social disorder. That kind of poisonous hatred, not just for a particular woman and her ideas, but for women's issues in general, shows that he is someone with severely disordered thinking and a lack of compassion truly alarming. The dude needs serious prayer. What he doesn't need is anyone to pay any kind of attention or heed to the worthless things he has said.


"NONE of us have earned respect, yet, by faith, we are saved. "

Amen, sister.

He sounds like a sexist arrogant pig and while I FULLY understand you wanting to write about it because you are angry about it (what woman wouldn't be?) you've already given him too much merit if you know what I mean. (and I am SO so so guilty of doing the same)
However, i could not agree MORE on the whole Christian hypocrisy thing and that is my biggest problem with my ex and his family members.

I can't wait until people like this discover us five "daddy bloggers." I guess we are just guys that are trying to act like the women that should be trying to become men.

I think I got that right.

Also, I discovered that there are actually more than five daddy bloggers. There are at least 100.

Oh, and most of my friends are women...largely because I like artsy fartsy stuff and can't stand watching sports on TV, I think. I'm not even gay!

Don't get too excited, though, I'm WAY taken. My wife is the best! (Also a better shot than me. I gotta be careful).

though i'm not a religious person (as you're well aware), i completely respect your beliefs and your faith because you are smart and thoughtful and have a fire in you for justice that embraces life and the people that surround you. i can't think of a better example of what it means to be Christian -- that is, a true follower of Christ's teachings. you embody that, and i adore you for it.

as for the blowhard in question? just a peek at his wikipedia page tells the tale. it must be awful to to him, don't you think? to be someone so convinced of their superiority and rightness that it extinguishes their humanity, their empathy. still, i can't say i feel sorry for him much. it's more something akin to disdainful pity.

Thanks for coming up with such a reasoned, impassioned response to this. When I first came across his post today via Twitter link (I think it was yours!) I was so flummoxed. I could feel the hate coming out od the screen, from him, and his nasty minions. So I left. I'm sad that there are still people like that in the world- many of his "arguments" reminded me of the things men used to say when trying to prevent women from getting the vote.

If he has a wife, I hope she reads that blog.

I love you for this, I really, really do. I mean, I loved you already, but this? Amps it up to MAD LOVE.

How a Christian man can write in such a way that expresses hate towards women - mothers! - just, I don't know - I wish I could say that it baffles me, but sadly... it just gives so many men, and Christians, a bad name. And I hate that, probably more than the personal attack on me (which was completely nonsensical).

Dana, with this post, you just became my hero. Brilliant.
xo, Alli

I wonder if this man has forgotten that he came from someone very similar to all of us horrible mommybloggers? Just sayin'.


What I love best of all about this, which is not the actual point, or perhaps it is on the peripheral, is that by saying all of this, by writing the truth and calling out someone of faith who is not living up to his word, helps ME, who is of no faith because of people like that.

Can I use a longer sentence?

It's those people that not only pushed (shoved, really) me away from the church, it's how vocal those people are. And here you are, being all sorts of amazing and wonderfully honest and true and when it matters YOU stand up and get vocal. Which means there's hope and love in those things that are The Faith.

And I love you for it.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. I was saddened by Day's remarks, though not overly surprised. How many people are out there blatently spitting in the face of the Faith that I love so dearly? How many people make me look like a hypocrite because I am merely placed in the same category as them - a self proclaimed Christian. Thank you for standing up for Truth. Thank you for calling this man out on his hypocricy. It's not about feeling insulted as a mommy blogger (though I am), but it's the deeper issue of being insulted to the very core of my being. I love God not because I deserve to love God, but because He called me to love Him. I'm not always good at it, either. I tend to be a lot like my 5 year old, throwing tantrums and fits on a daily basis. But I am covered in the blood of grace and I cling to that with a deep reverence. It's just this reverence that Day is clearly lacking. I appreciate people who are genuine in the faith. Thank you for being one of those.

I forgot:
Instead of pink puffy hearting VD or whatever the heck his name is, I:
Black skull and crossbones VD.
(If you wasted 20 minutes reading his neanderthal commenters, as I did, that will make sense.)
That is all.

Let's see. I don't wish to justify my eventual comments but I think it must be said that I am
* Athiest
* D&D Enthusiast
* (ex) Member of Mensa (got in when I was in 1st grade - then found out that you don't get anything cool, so I let my membership lapse)

So take those facts as you may as they may color what I am about to say.

It seems it often happens that guys like that, who fervently proclaim their faith, yet are misongynist pigdogs are actually GAY.

Nothing wrong with it, but a self-hating homosexual is always sad.

This is amazing for me to read yet another man trying to say mother bloggers are subpar. And, yes, I agree that he makes it hard for us Christians who don't walk around w/ our halo encased for all to see.

I just wrote about how I don't shout my faith because it scares people. Makes me think; I am a faithful person AND a mom AND I blog. Wow, that is a like a subpar trifecta to some.

Great post.

I have nothing wittier or funnier or smarter or more meaningful to say than what you have written in this post.


This guy sounds like he has no respect for even his own mother. Shame on him.

I just love the Tombstone quote for the title!

I love how you call people out when they deserve it! Also, remind me never to hack you off!

You have been responded to:

Vox's Reply

Vox has responded on his blog: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2008/07/she-begins-to-bitchify.html

Also, I would not consider Wikipedia 'authoritative' in any way. It is very easy to change entries according a person's worldview and there is no 'peer' review system in place. At best, I tend to take that site with a huge grain of salt.

Atlas - no one used Wikipedia in any sort of authoritative way whatsoever so I have no idea what you're trying to get at here. Much of the information found on that page is also found via various independent sources around the internet.

Sorry, the Wikipedia reference was for another blog I was reading at the same time as this one. Please disregard that.

Need more caffeine...

*rolling eyes at Vox*


He's a woman hater, which is rather obvious from perusing his blog. It also seems pretty obvious that most of his readers are too. They spew vitriol about women and hatred toward mothers. I'm guessing if he finds a women to date him, they'll be on the news someday because he accidentally killed her during one of her routine beatdowns.

I don't normally bring my religion to your blog, but I'd like to point out that as an obvious heretic he will get his judgement someday. And it won't be pretty.

Vox makes a very good point. The post here is no less vitriolic except for the immediate qualification of "Oh, see that was mean." The sting of the bite is no less painful even if you insincerely offer a band-aid. It reminds me of the Dumb and Dumber quote, "Man you are one pathetic loser... no offense."

That man is grossly misinformed as to his writing and reasoning abilities. Of course, as you said, had his father not worked with World Net Daily he likely would not have gotten a job there. A lot of what you said just went right over his head, lol.

He is wrong on so many points I don't even know where to begin. He misinterprets the Bible, that's a place to start, I guess. He preaches exclusiveness and hate and he doesn't know how to disagree with someone beyond name-calling and boring, over-written posts. (Why is it bad writers assume that they need to over-write things in order to be seen as better writers? It makes it worse!)

He bleats on and on about how mombloggers are so self-absorbed but here he writes multiple posts on the subject, determined that someone pay attention to him and his very limited viewpoints.

All of this drama has probably brought him more attention than he's ever had in his junior high internet existence. It's sad that he's too immersed in nursing his own ego to recognize valid points when they slap him in the face. Some people are just too far gone, Dana.

Your comments confuse criticism of a group of women with all women or all mothers. Going to "he has no respect for his own mother" is a pretty big leap from "these women blog about meaningless things are are angy they are not treated as seriously as those blogging about serious things." The example of this being no different than a bunch of D&D guys blogging about their very small world is spot on, and I suspect VD would agree with it. This blogging community is tightly focussed on non-universal (and some might say non-interesting) topics. As you describe yourself, you blog for very different reasons than typical, well read bloggers do. That's fine. Just don't believe then that you are of their ilk.

Dana - way to respond with class. I commend you, seriously. I've been composing responses to this guy in my head all day, but number one is that I can't figure out how there's anything Christian about his response (I know others have said that). Perhaps he's one of those people who feels powerful with the anonymity of the internet. Perhaps he's just short. (THAT was mean.)

Living and writing well is the best revenge.

Personally, I don't think anybody should waste time writing about Vox. He makes his position on things female pretty well known...but he is writing for an audience who enjoys reading those things. If you don't...then don't read his column or blog...it simply gives him more fodder to write about. I love "mommyblogs". I have learned about organization, cooking, budgeting, spirituality, child care, recycling, etc. As for this gentleman...so what if he doesn't understand those things...we do...and that is all that really matters. As for this comment "Oh, get over yourself, you narcissistic, brainless, lactating cow"...he may as well be describing himself though you would have to insert something equally disgusting for lactating cow of course. Thankfully, most moms are above name calling...we hear it enough from our two year olds.

Wear his scorn as a badge of honor.......

With regard to the deleting and not reading anonymous comments without valid e-mail addresses, the reason that I would leave an anonymous comment or not give a valid e-mail address is actually not related to the people with whom I am having a discussion.

The main reason for not leaving a valid e-mail is that I don't want spam. Even if I don't think you are going to take my e-mail and spam me, I don't know what blogging service you are using, what computers they are hosted on, etc. and how reputable everyone down the chain is.

The reason for not giving a full name is to not be Google-d into perpetuity. It's not that I wouldn't stand by anything I say. I would face to face with anyone. But these conversations are like conversations in everyday life. It's not necessary to have an instant Google-able record of everything I've said in everyday conversation. It's trivial stuff. I don't do that in real life so why should I have a full record of everything I say on the Internet for the world to Google?

In any case, anyone can create an infinite number of e-mail accounts. I have several for different levels of spam which I never check. So in that sense, a valid e-mail address is no better than an invalid one. I can also make up a name and nobody reading it would know if it's my real name or not. Even if I give my real first name, it's pretty much another name for Anonymous in Internet land.

Lets look at a few statements here -

By Christa on July 31, 2008 1:00 PM

That man is grossly misinformed as to his writing and reasoning abilities. Of course, as you said, had his father not worked with World Net Daily he likely would not have gotten a job there.

This distinctly implies nepotism. I'd note that his father no longer is affiliated with WND yet Vox remains a well read columnist. One might conclude that Vox's father had nothing to do with his WND column, his prior publications notwithstanding.

By Amy in StL on July 31, 2008 12:43 PM

He's a woman hater, which is rather obvious from perusing his blog. It also seems pretty obvious that most of his readers are too. They spew vitriol about women and hatred toward mothers. I'm guessing if he finds a women to date him, they'll be on the news someday because he accidentally killed her during one of her routine beatdowns.

Lets see. Had this commenter perused Vox's blog she'd know that Vox is married, and has children. One might conclude that since she is in error here, she's probably in error with the rest of her comment. Evidently she has not perused Vox's blog. If in fact she has, then she is a liar and again the remainder of her comment is suspect and she is worthy of contempt.

By blogversary on July 31, 2008 7:10 AM

This is amazing for me to read yet another man trying to say mother bloggers are subpar.

That is not what Vox was saying at all. One might be a (i.e.) Hemingway yet if the subject is not of interest but to a minority of readers, one should not expect to be hit central (which is a measure of one's being read) and be taken seriously if one whines about it.

It's not your blogging ladies, it the whining.

I'll give you your point that many of the responses here are very generalized with regard to Vox and most of us didn't bother to read the rest of his blog to know all the details of his personal life (since we vehemently disagreed with the post in question, it's unlikely we'd want to continue reading).

However, I call bullshit on the idea that "mommy blogging" only appeals to a "minority of readers". Do you and the rest of Teddy's clan members have any idea the number of visitors to some of these blogs? Can you fathom the idea that some mothers make enough money from their blogs ad revenue to support their families?

Childless/free people read these blogs. Employees of major corporations read these blogs. Political candidates read these blogs. Why? Not necessarily because they can relate to tales of "her vulnerabilities, her breast-feeding, her tears, and her fears", but because the posts are informative, intelligent, entertaining, thought-provoking and create an emotional response.

"Mommy Blogging" is an empire that is growing stronger every day. Not at all an interest of just the minority.

One commenter leaves this for another who doesn't quite agree with Vox's defense of rape:

"Answer: I'm Not sure."
About anything and everything.
Truth, at last out of the "master "
master baiter.

uummm...sounds a bit like a middle school locker room over there...hard to argue with this type of raw intellect.

Unfortunately some (many?) people have a hard time finding the line between evangelical and over zealous. Ultimately none of our kerfuffles matter so let this guy spout his venom and answer to God (just like the rest of us). This guy really needs to attend BlogHer next year so he can see for himself how wrong he is about mommybloggers.


Powered by Movable Type 4.1




Dana asks: "Thanksgiving Traditions: Yours or Your Mother's?"