#history repeats esp if you never learnt it

[mindibindi]

What d'you mean NOW? Giving women books has always been one of society's fave preoccupations. Cos our hormonal lil brains cannot deal with fiction and information and worldly content and--- ...where be my smelling salts I am so over-stimulated I could faint! Whole BOOKS were written about the danger of giving women books. Sermons given. Newspapers written to. Pamphlets disseminated. Plays enacted. And then, because they made the pivotal mistake of letting women READ and WRITE, women wrote a bunch of books satirising all of those books and letters and sermons and pamphlets etc. If you're ever wondering if you're on the wrong political track, being sold a dud line of thought, ask yourself this: would some bearded pastor in England have written to the papers about this back in 1838? If so, then you're not being original. Quite the opposite.

Also: while we are on the topic. Books for children were originally the subject of widespread moral panic too. It was thought that children's literature was dangerous as it could instill values in children at such a young age. And WHO would be instilling those values? Who would be reading those books to the impressionable youth? WHO would be WRITING the first examples of children's literature? You guessed it. Women. But don't worry the mens soon took over that important role, making sure that children's literature (like all other literature) was their province and contained exactly the values that patriarchy values to this day.

THE END.

Are we calling women who read shitty harlequin romance novels porn addicts now?

If you read one paragraph of vintage victorian smut you'd hurl.