Christopher Owens πŸ”– “...while this may technically be the best time to be a woman in the West, that’s like saying it is the best time in history to have a vital limb amputated.’'


Sigh.

It’s this doomer worldview that makes it impossible to have conversations with certain groups of people.

Yet, to an extent, I get it.

Not just because 2026 has been such a whirlwind so far that it’s impossible to know what’s coming up, but also because it’s easy to imagine that you have no control over your life and thus not take any risks. In other words, being a victim is an utterly seductive proposition for many, on both the left and right.

As Frank Furedi recently argued:

For the political right, the victim offered a new point of contact with what it regarded as an alienated silent majority. Amid moral uncertainty—when traditional conservative values seemed threatened by the so-called permissive society—the victim became a potential focus for renewing civic solidarity...a moral stance against crime and public empathy for victims would strengthen ties to family and community... But conservatives were not alone in turning towards victimhood...In the 1960s and 1970s, liberal and radical politics underwent a significant transformation: many groups once regarded as agents of change were increasingly cast as victims of the system. The women’s movement followed a similar trajectory. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, feminists often resisted representing women as victims. By the late 1970s, that position had shifted. Campaigns began to foreground the woman victim—battered, violated, raped. Suffering, too, became a political resource. Victimology was less challenged than politicised. Political forces began to contest which experiences entitled people to the status of victim, turning victim identity into a moral and political prize.

Hence why it’s now up for debate about whether protesting farmers are dupes for the far-right or whether government officials attacking the media coverage is a good thing.

The main problem with being a perpetual victim is that you become blind to the progress already made and end up living an unfulfilled life where everyone else is to blame except for yourself. You never unearth your potential to make the world a better place, nor do you see your fellow citizens as equals.

So now would be the perfect time to remind us how far women’s freedom has come.

Enter Zoe Strimpel.

Writing this book, her openly stated aims are to demonstrate that:

careerism is Good for women. Even mothers. And their children.

Women do Not (generally) belong behind the sink with a brood.

a lot of evolutionary psychology is Bunk. Regressive, sexist, dumb.
‘the female of the species’ is quite often the more promiscuous, and more deadly.
Attacking us should be dangerous.

Quite lofty aims and while the book isn’t a complete success, there is an awful lot to ponder within its pages.

One section in particular highlighted how conservatives and liberals both dislike the concept of women defending themselves from physical attacks:

..I have often thought about how good it would be for all girls and women...to go through mandatory martial arts training tailored specifically to attacks from men...As I went around making these points, I garnered incredulous disapproval and dismissive snorts. That’s because, in the mode of passive complaint favoured by progressive women, it is important never to do something that is not ‘your job’...underlying the...argument seems to lurk the assumption that it is somehow unnatural to ask women to respond violently to violence...

When considered further, the implications are disturbing.

Her unabashed view of capitalism as saviour will not go down particularly well in certain quarters but the ultimate message of how it has never been a better time to be a woman in the Western world is certainly a necessary antidote to the endless amounts of doomsayers in today's society.

On one hand, Good Slut is an attempt to demonstrate that women in 2026 need to stop thinking of themselves as perpetual victims and take chances. On the other hand, there are problems.

When trying to defend the right to abortion, she uses the “it’s just a collection of cells” argument which, though technically true, is not a persuasive argument for many. In fact, some would consider it, at best, infantilising and, at worst, callous. Abortion is something virtually every woman goes into with an understanding of what will happen and a deep awareness of the consequences. Most understand that it’s a human life so, if an abortion is requested, it’s better not to infantilise but confront the matter head on. Through this, we not only defend the right for a woman to choose but we also can offer help and understanding afterwards through frank and honest conversations.

Another eye roller is when she claims that Hillary and Kamala weren’t elected due to a lingering hostility among some in America about a woman being president. This viewpoint is utterly laughable considering Kamala dropped out of the 2019 primaries after being clocked by Tulsi Gabbard, only to be rescued by Biden when he needed a way to show how forward thinking he was, while Camille Paglia hit the nail on the head when she said that:

Hillary has benefited enormously from being a woman. People don't lay a glove on her. If she were not a woman...people would go after her—all of her opponents would have gone after her, you know, far, far more severely—for her corruption, her dishonesty, you know, for her...the woman has never succeeded at any job. She's created chaos after chaos, including now all of North Africa spilling its refugees into Europe is due to Hillary, you know, taking out Gaddafi and not thinking about what would happen afterward...

Finally, Strimpel’s argument that Bonnie Blue and Lily Phillips represent what a truly robust liberal society looks like may very well be true on the face of it, and Strimpel is correct that conservatives and liberals are uncomfortable with the notion that both consented to do what they did (hence why we’ve seen articles attacking the notion of consent), the situation does ask awkward questions about the pornification of society and how that is separate from casual sex.

Regardless, there is still a fair bit to chew on in here. Maybe it will inspire a few to remove the ‘victim’ mantle from their mindset before going on to change the world for the better. And if it does, then the book has done its job.

Zoe Strimpel, 2026, Good Slut: How Money, Sex and Power Set Women Free. Constable. ISBN: 978-1408720974
 
⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist and is the author of A Vortex of Securocrats and “dethrone god”.

Good Slut

Christopher Owens πŸ”– “...while this may technically be the best time to be a woman in the West, that’s like saying it is the best time in history to have a vital limb amputated.’'


Sigh.

It’s this doomer worldview that makes it impossible to have conversations with certain groups of people.

Yet, to an extent, I get it.

Not just because 2026 has been such a whirlwind so far that it’s impossible to know what’s coming up, but also because it’s easy to imagine that you have no control over your life and thus not take any risks. In other words, being a victim is an utterly seductive proposition for many, on both the left and right.

As Frank Furedi recently argued:

For the political right, the victim offered a new point of contact with what it regarded as an alienated silent majority. Amid moral uncertainty—when traditional conservative values seemed threatened by the so-called permissive society—the victim became a potential focus for renewing civic solidarity...a moral stance against crime and public empathy for victims would strengthen ties to family and community... But conservatives were not alone in turning towards victimhood...In the 1960s and 1970s, liberal and radical politics underwent a significant transformation: many groups once regarded as agents of change were increasingly cast as victims of the system. The women’s movement followed a similar trajectory. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, feminists often resisted representing women as victims. By the late 1970s, that position had shifted. Campaigns began to foreground the woman victim—battered, violated, raped. Suffering, too, became a political resource. Victimology was less challenged than politicised. Political forces began to contest which experiences entitled people to the status of victim, turning victim identity into a moral and political prize.

Hence why it’s now up for debate about whether protesting farmers are dupes for the far-right or whether government officials attacking the media coverage is a good thing.

The main problem with being a perpetual victim is that you become blind to the progress already made and end up living an unfulfilled life where everyone else is to blame except for yourself. You never unearth your potential to make the world a better place, nor do you see your fellow citizens as equals.

So now would be the perfect time to remind us how far women’s freedom has come.

Enter Zoe Strimpel.

Writing this book, her openly stated aims are to demonstrate that:

careerism is Good for women. Even mothers. And their children.

Women do Not (generally) belong behind the sink with a brood.

a lot of evolutionary psychology is Bunk. Regressive, sexist, dumb.
‘the female of the species’ is quite often the more promiscuous, and more deadly.
Attacking us should be dangerous.

Quite lofty aims and while the book isn’t a complete success, there is an awful lot to ponder within its pages.

One section in particular highlighted how conservatives and liberals both dislike the concept of women defending themselves from physical attacks:

..I have often thought about how good it would be for all girls and women...to go through mandatory martial arts training tailored specifically to attacks from men...As I went around making these points, I garnered incredulous disapproval and dismissive snorts. That’s because, in the mode of passive complaint favoured by progressive women, it is important never to do something that is not ‘your job’...underlying the...argument seems to lurk the assumption that it is somehow unnatural to ask women to respond violently to violence...

When considered further, the implications are disturbing.

Her unabashed view of capitalism as saviour will not go down particularly well in certain quarters but the ultimate message of how it has never been a better time to be a woman in the Western world is certainly a necessary antidote to the endless amounts of doomsayers in today's society.

On one hand, Good Slut is an attempt to demonstrate that women in 2026 need to stop thinking of themselves as perpetual victims and take chances. On the other hand, there are problems.

When trying to defend the right to abortion, she uses the “it’s just a collection of cells” argument which, though technically true, is not a persuasive argument for many. In fact, some would consider it, at best, infantilising and, at worst, callous. Abortion is something virtually every woman goes into with an understanding of what will happen and a deep awareness of the consequences. Most understand that it’s a human life so, if an abortion is requested, it’s better not to infantilise but confront the matter head on. Through this, we not only defend the right for a woman to choose but we also can offer help and understanding afterwards through frank and honest conversations.

Another eye roller is when she claims that Hillary and Kamala weren’t elected due to a lingering hostility among some in America about a woman being president. This viewpoint is utterly laughable considering Kamala dropped out of the 2019 primaries after being clocked by Tulsi Gabbard, only to be rescued by Biden when he needed a way to show how forward thinking he was, while Camille Paglia hit the nail on the head when she said that:

Hillary has benefited enormously from being a woman. People don't lay a glove on her. If she were not a woman...people would go after her—all of her opponents would have gone after her, you know, far, far more severely—for her corruption, her dishonesty, you know, for her...the woman has never succeeded at any job. She's created chaos after chaos, including now all of North Africa spilling its refugees into Europe is due to Hillary, you know, taking out Gaddafi and not thinking about what would happen afterward...

Finally, Strimpel’s argument that Bonnie Blue and Lily Phillips represent what a truly robust liberal society looks like may very well be true on the face of it, and Strimpel is correct that conservatives and liberals are uncomfortable with the notion that both consented to do what they did (hence why we’ve seen articles attacking the notion of consent), the situation does ask awkward questions about the pornification of society and how that is separate from casual sex.

Regardless, there is still a fair bit to chew on in here. Maybe it will inspire a few to remove the ‘victim’ mantle from their mindset before going on to change the world for the better. And if it does, then the book has done its job.

Zoe Strimpel, 2026, Good Slut: How Money, Sex and Power Set Women Free. Constable. ISBN: 978-1408720974
 
⏩ Christopher Owens was a reviewer for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland. He is currently the TPQ Friday columnist and is the author of A Vortex of Securocrats and “dethrone god”.

2 comments:

  1. I’ve said it for many a year now that “victimhood” has become a new “subculture”, the new “Cool” so to speak
    Everyone is desperately seeking something they can cling to and be part of the “gang” Then of course we have the far left who if you can’t an oppression in your life they’ll find it for you - Human rights for gingers ✊

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gary,

      had a proper chuckle at "Human rights for gingers ✊"!

      Delete