Heather Mac Donald: The Thinking Bigot’s Ann Coulter

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

I warned y’all to watch Heather Mac Donald.

The rest of us bloviators may have slowed down for the summer, but not Ms. Mac Donald. While the anti-Negro crusade remains her lode star, she takes a break now and then to dog women. I mean, feminism. Thank god that all those poor, oppressed white men have her to champion the sorry state to which they have been reduced.

I certainly understand the rigors of producing columns when nothing newsworthy strikes your fancy, but she spends a whole lotta words bemoaning the whole lotta words that the Times spent on a campaign at the no doubt ritzy Phoenix Country Club to equalize the sex-segregated facilities for which members pay bazillions each year:

The struggle for women’s equality comes down to this: The men’s grill in the Phoenix Country Club has television and a bar, while the women’s grill has neither of those amenities—though it soon will, following renovation.

So, let’s follow the logic, such as it is: “It’s been a hard year for the cause of female victimhood, as the Times’ close attention to one golf club’s eating facilities suggests.”

Her proof? Sen. Clinton’s robust support from white working-class men. Which, in Heather’s world, proves their lack of sexism and not, I repeat not, their embrace of racism, a flaw in her reasoning that appears never to have occurred to her since she doesn’t even raise the notion to summarily dismiss it.

But Miss M is nothing if not dogged—she’s wearily disproving sexism here y’all, not racism—since she regularly proves the non-existence of that silly, anti-white notion. And how self-evident that discussing golf course facilities proves women have nothing left to complain about, if they ever did. I must have missed the articles in which she ‘proved’ the latter as well.

I dunno, Heather—maybe it’s a way of talking about how the remnants of overt sexism are everywhere to be found. (By the way, the women’s facilities are being upgraded, but why? Because even women paying max dollars—presumably the same hefty amount that men with their better facilities were paying—got the shaft until now. I’m betting lots of those men are bitching about the cost of the upgrades.

I’m reminded of male fliers in my USAF days bitterly blaming female fliers for the cost of retrofitting aircraft with toilets, since they’d had only urinals. Logical much?

Exhibit B that feminism is nothing but victimhood and whining (and this bit is such a doozy, I couldn’t bear to truncate it):

Clinton’s popularity with working-class male voters is hardly the only obstacle to the perpetuation of the patriarchy myth. Wherever you look, pesky facts suggest that far from being hindered by their sex, women reap benefits galore. Every elite institution in the country—from Wall Street law firms to Fortune 500 companies to major media outlets—tries constantly to put as many women in prominent positions as it can, whether as partners, board directors, editors, op-ed contributors, or talking heads. Whenever the absence of remotely suitable candidates hinders this mission, the same institutions wail a mea culpa and promise to make amends. Federal and state governments pour millions of taxpayer dollars into the production of more female scientists, even though the sex ratio in a microbiology lab will have absolutely no bearing on whether it discovers the cure for cancer or for Alzheimer’s disease. Since many elementary and high schools now function as cheering squads for Grrrl Power, the idea that even more resources are required to overcome some still-unlocated bias against, say, female physicists is ludicrous. Female undergraduates now outnumber their male counterparts, which hasn’t resulted in the closing of a single college women’s center dedicated to providing girls with a “safe space” on campus.

I italicized those lines above ‘cuz I just love ’em so much. This is Mother Jones; do I need to explain why?

Mac Donald misses not one trick in the ideologue’s book: “Time was when liberals would have professed to care about the dishwashers in the Phoenix Country Club, not the members who send them their dirty dishes to be washed. But the narcissism of today’s elites knows no bounds.”

Double whammy: “Professed to care”. Girlfriend will commit seppuku before she gives a liberal an inch. God forbid she should consider that the Times isn’t the liberal boogeyman she’s helped the right create—talk about having your cake (create a fake monster) and eating it, too (dog your faux Frankenstein). Might she have considered, again, that sexism knows no class distinctions? Those facilities were designed in the 1980s, according to her; that recently women were paying for second class digs?

No, it isn’t Selma, but it’s not nothing either.

‘Elite narcisism’—my how I love this one, right-wing elites pretending not to be so they can front being on the little guy’s side. Fake class conflict—love that one. Mac Donald thinks the poor’s poverty is their own fault; who’s this ‘argument’ for except as talking points for her less propogandistic apologetic right-wing elites?

Attagirl Ms. Mac Donald, the thinking bigot’s Ann Coulter.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend