This evening I really want to go to Fitteprat (that means cunt talk, it’s a feminist literature reading and discussion) – my girlfriend Gro is speaking, so is my MA thesis advisor (one of them) and there are lots of other people I know there too. But I’ve already bagged my mum to babysit my daughter tomorrow – it’s the Prize Dinner – and two babysittings in a row seem a bit bad-motherly.

It just occurred to me I could bring my daughter. It’s about, um, women. But, um, I don’t think there’ll be many other nine-year-old girls there. What to do, what to do?


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

7 thoughts on “fitteprat

  1. Mum

    No problem – just ask!!

  2. Mum

    No problem – just ask – we had a great time!!

  3. Elin

    ….or…. just ask…. me:-)

  4. Jill

    Thanks to a wonderful mother, I got to go to this – but it was FULL! Not just standing room only, but standing room outside the bar where you can’t see anything and can only hear a little-only. Very disappointing. S. and I went and had a cup of hot chocolate instead, though, which was very nice.

    Elin and Mum: you’re both awesome 🙂 And next time I’ll ask sooner!

  5. Grogro

    Hi jill, pity you couldn’t get in. The fitteprat was
    nice,it was more about sex as in gender and less about
    sex as in bodies in movement (-making babyes). I liked
    my position as a dirty writer of pornography, but wow
    there are som many taboos in this field. A bit surprising

  6. Jill

    You got hit by taboos in a panel called cunt talk? Heh. Wish I could have heard that!

  7. Elin

    I wonder why I like that word better in English than Norwegian…

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.