by Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux
Welcome to the new decade, EW readers! We’re looking forward to ringing in 2010, feminist blog-style, starting on Sunday, when we’ll be returning with our normal posting schedule. Until then, because we know that we are your most trusted source for feminist commentary and news, some links:
The WaPo blew it again, for the second time this week. Stereotyping female politicians? Not so cool.
Weird, weird article from the Economist uses the phrase “gender asbestos.” Is that really a thing people say? I have mixed feelings about the article itself – but I do agree with this: “People who bang on about innate differences should remember that variation within subgroups in the population is usually bigger than the variation between subgroups.” And yes, author of this article, we realize that you’re British.
A new EC campaign (for New Year’s, but still kind of relevant) with an amazing video.
And oh man, The Babysitter’s Club is coming back.
Also, just because I am newly obsessed with this remix: here you are, the only thing that could make me listen to Journey. Happy New Year, everyone!
Group differences don’t matter much on an individual level, but they do matter when one group is hell-bent on insisting that they don’t exist, and is willing to advocate discriminatory policies so that all groups are equally represented everywhere.
See: Ricci vs. New Haven (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricci_v._DeStefano), where any difference between group outcomes was automatically assumed to be discrimination, under a statute that is still in effect.