re: #639 Daria Emmons

That is only if you view the term ‘hawk’ as a negative.

But then, those who view the term ‘hawk’ as a negative would not go to LGF anyway. So the bottomline is that the article was a compliment to LGF for those who consider themselves feminist hawks, and derogatory of LGF for those who believe the term ‘hawk’ is a derogatory term.

But who gives a flying fig about the latter group?

The article was not facially derogatory.

But there’s a helluva lotta people at the NYT who view the term ‘hawk’ as derogatory. Including the author of the piece. And that author was writing to those who agree with her.