Slate's "Double X" Targets Women, But Not Feminists?

Slate launched Double X today, a site for women that is described as:

Double X is a new Web magazine, founded by women but not just for women, that Slate launched in spring 2009. The site spins off from Slate's XX Factor blog, where we started a conversation among women-about politics, sex, and culture-that both men and women listen in on. Double X takes the Slate and XX Factor sensibility and applies it to sexual politics, fashion, parenting, health, science, sex, friendship, work-life balance, and anything else you might talk about with your friends over coffee. We tackle subjects high and low with an approach that's unabashedly intellectual but not dry or condescending. The blog is at the heart of the site, but we also publish essays, reporting, and other features.

Interestingly, this is a bit different from what was included in the description of the site a few months ago:

We believe this is the right moment to launch a women's magazine that doesn't resemble any other in existence. The new site will tap into a crossroads moment in feminism, when the 1970s are firmly behind us but no one knows what's next. (Generational cross-fighting, post-feminist indifference, proof of biological sex differences?).

I wrote about it in November and I'll say it again now: for some reason or another, this site smells of post-feminist dogma and it just doesn't make me very excited. While I do believe it is a great thing to see more women's voices find another home online, it is concerning that Double X seems to want women readers, but not feminists.

This is not only strange, but also bad business for a new blog in my opinion. Given how supportive and influential the fem-o-sphere is in terms of building linkfluence, shared content and community - by purposefully going against the feminist movement, I think Double X is really hurting itself. Not to mention that the title of the blog totally drags women back to some kind of biological existence. How can a blog try to be a place that's intellectual, but not condescending when it serves to remind women of their chromosome count? I thought we got past that in 1973.

Additionally, with headlines dripping from the front page such as How I Got Bored With Feminism, Whine, Womyn, and Thongs and Yes, Virginia, Feminism Really Is Dead - any feminist has to be critical of the motive behind the site. Jill over at Feministe shares her opinion about the Double X piece, The Trouble With Jezebel :

I will argue that a feminism which requires perfection from all women is not something I can be a part of. And I'll also just throw it out there that one probably should not pull the "You're a bad feminist" card when one writes for a feminist website that launches with front-page articles like "Whine, Womyn and Thongs: How feminism has failed" and "How I Got Bored With Feminism."

Just to be clear, this isn't an indictment of DoubleX. Their editorial staff is great, and I've heard that they have some amazing pieces lined up. I am genuinely excited to see what else they put out. But the "I'm more feminist than you, you slut" stuff? I hope it stops.

After reading the bios of the women who started Double X, it is startling to read the seemingly post-feminist and judgmental opinions which populate the site during such an early stage given the really incredible backgrounds of the editors and founders. While I don't need to read a publication that confirms my own opinions, it just seems like a bizarre approach - particularly during a launch period - to alienate those who could be your strongest supporters.