Editing Naomi Wolf (section)

===''Vagina: A New Biography'' (2012)===
''Vagina: A New Biography'' was much criticized, especially by feminist authors. [[Katie Roiphe]] called it "ludicrous" in ''[[Slate (website)|Slate]]'': "I doubt the most brilliant novelist in the world could have created a more skewering satire of Naomi Wolf's career than her latest book."<ref name="Slate20120910" /> In ''[[The Nation]]'', [[Katha Pollitt]] called it a "silly book" containing "much dubious neuroscience and much foolishness." It becomes "loopier as it goes on. We learn that women think and feel through their vagina, which can 'grieve' and feel insulted."<ref name="Pollitt20121001">{{cite news|last=Pollitt|first=Katha|url=http://www.thenation.com/article/169888/naomi-wolfs-vagina-no-carnations-please-were-goddesses|title=Naomi Wolf's ''Vagina'': No Carnations, Please, We're Goddesses|work=The Nation|date=October 1, 2012|access-date=November 18, 2019|archive-date=April 12, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150412081420/http://www.thenation.com/article/169888/naomi-wolfs-vagina-no-carnations-please-were-goddesses|url-status=live}}</ref>

[[Toni Bentley]] wrote in ''[[The New York Times Book Review]]'' that Wolf used "shoddy research methodology", while with "her graceless writing, Wolf opens herself to ridicule on virtually every page."<ref>{{cite news|last=Bentley|first=Toni|title=Upstairs, Downstairs 'Vagina: A New Biography,' by Naomi Wolf|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/books/review/vagina-a-new-biography-by-naomi-wolf.html|newspaper=The New York Times|date=September 14, 2012|access-date=February 11, 2017|archive-date=May 14, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170514054229/http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/books/review/vagina-a-new-biography-by-naomi-wolf.html|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Janice Turner]] in ''[[The Times]]'' wrote that since [[Mary Wollstonecraft]], female "writers have argued that women should not be defined by biology", yet "Wolf, our self-styled leader, has declared that female consciousness, creativity and destiny all come back" to a woman's genitals.<ref>{{cite news|last=Turner|first=Janice|url=https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/whos-afraid-of-vagina-wolf-or-even-cares-kwjwl3lx27w|title=Who's afraid of Vagina Wolf (or even cares)?|work=[[The Times]]|location=London|date=September 8, 2012|access-date=January 23, 2021|url-access=subscription|archive-date=January 16, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210116221150/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/whos-afraid-of-vagina-wolf-or-even-cares-kwjwl3lx27w|url-status=live}}</ref> ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'' columnist [[Meghan Daum]] wrote: "By asserting that what's between a woman's ears is directly informed by what's between her legs—'the vagina mediates female confidence, creativity and sense of transcendence,' Wolf writes—it acts as a perverse echo of Republican efforts to limit reproductive rights."<ref>{{cite news|last=Daum|first=Meghan|url=https://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-oe-daum-naomi-wolf-vagina-20120913-column.html|title=Naomi Wolf's vaginal sideshow|work=Los Angeles Times|date=September 13, 2012|access-date=March 2, 2021|archive-date=March 8, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308132227/https://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-oe-daum-naomi-wolf-vagina-20120913-column.html|url-status=live}}</ref> In the book, according to [[Suzanne Moore]] in ''The Guardian'', "feminism becomes simply a highly mediated form of narcissism devoid of any actual brain/politics connection."<ref>{{cite news|last=Moore|first=Suzanne|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/sep/05/naomi-wolf-book-vagina-feminism|title=Naomi Wolf's book Vagina: self-help marketed as feminism|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=September 5, 2012|access-date=March 1, 2021}}</ref>

In ''[[The New York Review of Books]]'', [[Zoë Heller]] wrote that the book "offers an unusually clear insight into the workings of her mystic feminist philosophy", that the part of the book about the history of the vagina's representation is "full of childlike generalizations", and that Wolf's understanding of science "is pretty shaky too".<ref>{{cite journal|last=Heller|first=Zoë|url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/sep/27/pride-and-prejudice/|title=Pride and Prejudice|journal=The New York Review of Books|date=September 27, 2012|volume=59|issue=14|access-date=November 18, 2019|archive-date=November 26, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151126062702/http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/sep/27/pride-and-prejudice/|url-status=live}}</ref> In an interview with ''The New York Times'', Wolf rejected claims that she had written more freely than her sources could sustain.<ref name="NYT20120919">{{cite news |last=Sandler |first=Lauren |date=September 19, 2012 |title=Naomi Wolf Sparks Another Debate (on Sex, of Course) |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/fashion/naomi-wolf-on-her-new-book-vagina.html |access-date=March 2, 2021 |archive-date=February 12, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210212155501/https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/fashion/naomi-wolf-on-her-new-book-vagina.html |url-status=live }}</ref> In ''[[The New York Observer]]'', [[Nina Burleigh]] suggested that critics of the book were so vehement "because (a) their editors handed the book to them for review because they thought it was an Important Feminist Book when it's actually slight and (b) there's a grain of truth in what she's trying to say."<ref>{{cite news|last=Burleigh|first=Nina|url=http://observer.com/2012/09/263089/|title=Who's Afraid of Vagina Wolf? Why Female Critics Are Piling On|work=Observer|location=New York City|date=September 13, 2012|access-date=September 16, 2012|archive-date=June 14, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190614225631/https://observer.com/2012/09/263089/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In response to the criticism, Wolf said in a television interview:

{{blockquote|Anything that shows documentation of the brain and vagina connection is going to alarm some feminists…also feminism has kind of retreated into the academy and sort of embraced the idea that all gender is socially constructed and so here is a book that is actually looking at science…though there has been some criticisms of the book from some feminists…who say, "well you can't look at the science because that means we have to grapple with the science"…to me the feminist task of creating a just world isn't changed at all by this fascinating neuroscience that shows some differences between men and women.<ref>[https://archive.today/20130416014911/http://allangregg.tvo.org/episode/186847/feminist-author-naomi-wolf-%22vagina:-a-new-biography.%22 Allen Gregg TV interview] "Naomi Wolf on her new book, Vagina: A New Biography", January 18, 2013. Quote starts 21min in.</ref>}}

At a party organized to celebrate Wolf's publishing deal for this book, the male host invited guests to make pasta pieces shaped like vulvas. Wolf came to view this as mocking, and recounted feeling pressured to remain silent as the butt of a joke, something she said women often feel pressured to do. She said the incident resulted in her having writer's block for the next six months.<ref>{{cite news|last=Lewis|first=Helen|url=https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/culture/2012/09/goddess-shaped-hole-naomi-wolfs-new-work|title=A goddess-shaped hole in Naomi Wolf's new work|work=New Statesman|location=London|date=September 5, 2012|access-date=January 23, 2021|archive-date=February 11, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210211231332/https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/culture/2012/09/goddess-shaped-hole-naomi-wolfs-new-work|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Wolf|first=Naomi|url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/sep/02/vagina-a-new-biography-naomi-wolf|title=Vagina: A New Biography by Naomi Wolf|work=The Guardian|location=London|date=September 2, 2012|access-date=January 23, 2021}}</ref>