The Post-Partisan Emporium

  All This Fury—Is It Really About Trump? Thoughts on women and rage Janice Fiamengo Feminist uproar over Trump’s election was easy to predict, and not long in coming. Within ten days of the election, Clara Jeffery wrote in  Mother Jones  that “ Women are furious—in a Greek mythology sort of way .” Taking examples from TikTok, Jeffery chronicled abundant “sorrow and disbelief and terror, but also incandescent rage,” which many women vowed to exorcise on men: “‘ If his ballot was red, his balls stay blue ,’” she quoted one. In  The New York Times , a 16-year-old girl, Naomi Beinart, charted her tumultuous emotions, which included a sense of betrayal because her male classmates had carried on with their lives on the day after the election, seemingly immune to the girls’ all-pervasive gloom and outrage. “ Many of them didn’t seem to share our rage, our fear, our despair . We don’t even share the same future,” Beinart opined melodramatically. No one with even a minimal a...

  Civil War II, Without Guns or Bayonets A House divided against itself Donald Jeffries The response to Donald Trump’s election continues to seethe and even explode, in all the big cities. In the upscale, lily-White gated communities. In the breakrooms of every public school. Behind the walls of Hollywood mansions. But most of all, on TikTok and Instagram, revealing America 2.0’s shocking level of insanity. In my last Substack, I blasted Trump for being Trumpenstein, as his initial cabinet choices were mirror images of the establishment disasters that he populated his first administration with. Marco Rubio for Secretary of State? But Trump must have been reading my Substack. Despite intimations that perhaps the Giant Orange Man is functionally illiterate, if he were to read something, what better than my humble offerings here? Trump’s picks of Matt Gaetz for Attorney General, and RFK, Jr. for Secretary of Health and Human Services, were met with the kind of reaction you’d expect fr...

  Which orifice? What organs? Who cares? Andrea Long Chu says all the quiet parts out loud MARY HARRINGTON The  award , in May, of a Pulitzer Prize for criticism to New York Magazine writer Andrea Long Chu, occasioned  howls  of outrage from gender-critical feminists. This was not prompted by the actual essays mentioned in the award, though. Rather, the fury stemmed from Long Chu’s real claim to fame: saying all the quiet parts out loud on gender ideology. The central provocation on this front is Chu’s 2019 monograph  Females , described by Verso as “a genre-defying investigation into sex and lies” and by gender-critical writer Lauren Smith as “ poorly disguised misogyny ”.  Females  draws together Chu’s personal development toward transgender identification, a re-read of work by  SCUM Manifesto  author Valerie Solanas, and a baroque theory of pornography and desire, into a central, controversial thesis: “Everyone is female, and everyone hate...