Oh! I see. My bad.

But, yes: for some reason, it’s very important to discipline my speech and writing!

Well, the “tone” argument is a classic in feminist and anti-racist derailing, from what I’ve seen. The best theory I’ve seen is that people with privilege (whites, men, etc.) have the tools (no pun intended?) to do verbal violence without seeming to lift a finger in anger, so that a woman/person of color who calls out “that hurt, you jerk!” ends up seeming like the attacking party, the angry one. We’re acculturated to notice and be offended by minutia, while privileged people can say things that create an oppressive atmosphere, that work toward silencing without seeming angry to others or experiencing much (any?) emotional turmoil themselves.

Getting back on topic. Whether or not Stone intended to contribute to diminishing women’s contributions to history or not, I can’t say. But I believe it’s the responsibility of people with social capital to first, recognize the power they have, and second make sure they’re not abusing it. The fact that it probably didn’t occur to him to do either of those things–and that he was cocooned in a publishing industry that didn’t call him on what he said–does make it pretty obvious how widespread the misogyny was, that someone could be participating in it without perhaps even meaning to.

Because of the patriarchal culture we live in, Lawrence Stone was able to wield significant rhetorical power with his “tone” in his article; it was all there for him, ready made as a man. He was even given a large, respectable forum to do it in via the NYTBR. But what’s more important than his easy marshaling of those forces against women who were struggling to create a historical voice for themselves is the fact that, twenty-odd years later, a woman calls him a “tool” on a blog.

Magnificent derailing skills.

Now, on topic: Stone published his review in the NY Review of Books, not in an academic journal. (Indeed, I doubt that a book review editor in an academic journal would have permitted him to be so condescending in a review–this is one of the problems with non-peer reviewed publications!) Stone wrote a truly obnoxious book review and published it in the NYRB–that makes him fair game for public criticism. I criticize all kinds of writers in mainstream publications and other media and public figures here–if you do a search on Lee Siegel, Maureen Dowd, Chris Matthews, you’ll get your hair blown back with some invective in those posts, too.

I appreciate the esteem you have for this non-peer reviewed publication, but I seriously doubt that what I think about a 24 year-old book review really matters to anyone but a few commenters here.

Thanks for your compliment, although we disagree on Stone.