To Critic Irving Howe, the book is "a farrago of blunders, distortions, vulgarities and plain nonsense," and its author is guilty of "historical reductionism," "crude simplification," "middleclass parochialism," "sexual monism," "methodological sloppiness," "arrogant ultimatism" and "comic ignorance." Howe's attack seemed certain to stir up an unholy war between the sexes. For it was directed against both the bible and the high priestess of the Women's Liberation movement: Sexual Politics and its author, Kate Millett.
Howe was not alone. Last week, while Kate and her allies were girding themselves for a new equality strike...
To continue reading:
or
Log-In
